*****************************************************************
08/04/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.184
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Sanctions Companies Over Iran
2 AFP: Top Iran official: nuclear work will continue
3 AFP: US imposes sanctions on Russian plane maker for Iran sales -
4 IRNA: Iran warns crude oil price will top $200 if sanctions are impo
5 AFP: Petition against nuclear deterrent handed to Downing Street -
6 AFP: US officials calm Indian fears over nuclear deal
7 Guardian: Comment is free: The limits of force
NUCLEAR REACTORS
8 US: [NukeNet] APP August 3 Corzine says he's against relicensing
9 US: [NukeNet] Global Warming vs. Power Plants, Part 2 (Jellyfish)
10 US: NRC: NRC Names New Senior Resident Inspector at Oconee Nuclear S
11 US: Knox News: DOE chief wants creation of new reactors
12 US: Daily Press: Victorville explores nuclear energy
13 US: NRC: NRC Announces Availability of License Renewal Application f
14 US: DOE: Secretary Bodman Announces Federal Risk Insurance for Nucle
15 US: Platts: US DOE completes final rule on nuclear plant risk insura
16 The Local: Left Party demands nuclear shutdown
17 US: APP.COM: Corzine a skeptic on plant, tax |
18 AFP: Greenpeace calls for worldwide nuclear probe after Swedish inci
19 Prague Daily Monitor: N-plant Dukovany lowers output due to network
20 US: SciAm Observations: Nuclear Loses Its Cool
21 Guardian: Comment is free: Let's shut down, not melt down
22 NewsRoom Finland: Swedish nuclear shutdown prompts investigation at
23 AFP: Sweden alerted IAEA about nuclear "incident," did not request h
24 US: Decatur Daily: TVA says stored waste not a threat: Athens nuclea
NUCLEAR SECURITY
25 US: SFSS: Lauderdale importer gets 2 years in prison in radioactive
NUCLEAR SAFETY
26 IPS-English ARGENTINA:Residents Face Uranium Threat in Water
27 US: Rachel's News #866: Nuclear Pandemic
28 The Australian: French nuke tests 'increased cancer'
29 Sydney Morning Herald: French nuke tests up cancer risk: report -
30 Platts: Sweden's Green call for investigation into nuclear reactor s
31 Independent: France's nuclear tests in Pacific 'gave islanders cance
32 US: DHHS: Exposure petition from General Atomics
33 US: The Spectrum: The 21st Century motto ought to be "Not on my plan
34 Prague Daily Monitor: Several thousand litres of radioactive water l
35 US: DHHS: Petition from Harshaw Chemical(Uranium Refinery)
36 US: DHHS: Designation of Employees
37 UPI: Study: French nuke tests linked to cancers
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
38 Sydney Morning Herald: Australia urged to take back nuke waste -
39 ThinkSpain: Mayor to re-think nuclear dump plan after protests
40 ENS: INSIGHTS: Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Dump is a Dying Beast
41 Las Vegas SUN: Loux's credibility attacked by pro-Yucca Idaho senato
42 reviewjournal.com: Project director says 'fix Yucca' bill must
43 US: Rutland Herald: Nuclear waste bill vexes politicians
44 US: Tennessean: Concerns raised over increasing amount of spent nucl
45 US: Easy bourse: US DOE Offers $20 Million For Nuclear Waste Recycli
46 US: AlterNet: EnviroHealth: Military Waste In Our Drinking Water
47 US: PRN: LES: LES Announces Jim Ferland's Resignation
48 US: Daily Local News: Radioactive waste, tardy guardians not a good
49 News & Star: We dont want nuclear waste
50 times and star: US firm leads N-waste storage race
51 US: nature.com: Nuclear waste gets star attention - Claims of
52 US: AJC: Utilities: Nuclear waste sits at plants |
PEACE
53 US: Anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
54 Guardian Unlimited: Most opposed to new nuclear weapons
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
55 Guardian Unlimited: Energy Chief Offers Nuclear Incentives
56 Amarillo Globe-News: Pantex railcars make last ride into history
57 SF New Mexican: LANL Chemist creates a safer form of ammo
58 Santa Fe New Mexican: Low levels of beryllium discovered at LANL bui
59 Platts: US DOE may sell up to 50 million pounds of uranium - sources
60 Hanford News: Last incinerator debris removed from Hanford
61 Hanford News: DOE's vit plant report available on the Web
62 Hanford News: DOE faulted for late contracts; Review urges agency to
63 DOE: State Energy Advisory Board
64 DOE: Extension of Comment Period on the Draft Environmental
65 DOE: Notice of Public Scoping Meetings for the FutureGen Project
66 lamonitor.com: Beryllium found in old DP building
67 TDP: Uranium leasing program sees two opposite views
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Sanctions Companies Over Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday August 4, 2006 8:16 PM
By GEORGE GEDDA
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration has imposed sanctions
against seven foreign companies, including two from India and
two from Russia, after accusing them of business dealings with
Iran involving sensitive technology, the government said Friday.
The action comes at a sensitive time for the Bush
administration, which is trying to push through Congress its
plan to sell civilian nuclear technology to India. In addition,
the U.S. is trying to enlist Moscow's help to pressure Iran and
North Korea to abandon their nuclear programs.
Tensions between the U.S. and Iran are running high over
Tehran's nuclear effort and its support for Hezbollah, the
militant group at war with Israel in southern Lebanon.
The seven businesses, which also included two from North Korea
and one from Cuba, were found to be in violation of the Iran
Nonproliferation Act of 2000. The law is aimed at preventing the
spread of weapons of mass destruction to Tehran.
Under the sanctions, the federal government is now prohibited
from dealing with any of the seven companies.
In the announcement of the action in the Federal Register, which
reports on official federal actions, the government did not
specify what items were involved. The State Department had no
immediate comment.
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., had received word of the planned
sanctions against the Indian companies weeks ago and said the
alleged violation raised questions about the administration's
groundbreaking deal to sell civilian nuclear technology to
India.
He criticized the administration for not disclosing the
activities of the firms before the House approved the nuclear
pact last month. The list of sanctioned parties was weeks
overdue, but State Department officials insisted the delay had
nothing to do with the House vote.
The list was turned over to the House International Relations
Committee a day after the House vote. The Senate has yet to
approve the nuclear pact.
The Russian Foreign Ministry described the U.S. action against
the Russian firms as a ``political and legal anachronism.'' In a
statement, the ministry insisted Russian companies dealing with
foreign countries act in ``strict conformity with the norms of
international law and Russian legislation.''
The Russian companies were Rosoboronexport, a state-controlled
arms exporter, and Sukhoi, a manufacturer of fighter jets.
The two Indian companies were Balaji Amines Ltd. and Prachi Poly
Products Ltd., both chemical manufacturers.
Also sanctioned were Korean Mining and Industrial Development
Corp. and Korea Pugang Trading Corp., both North Korean.
The Cuban company was the Center for Genetic Engineering and
Biotechnology.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
2 AFP: Top Iran official: nuclear work will continue
Fri Aug 4, 3:58 PM ET
CARACAS (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranwill not stop its controversial
nuclear work despite a UN resolution calling for a halt by
month's end, the Islamic republic's deputy foreign minister told
Latin American television.
"None of these measures can force Iran to put aside its peaceful
activities to obtain nuclear technology," Deputy Foreign Minister
Manouchehr Mohammadi told Telesur television, according to a
Spanish translation of the interview with the regional
broadcaster.
"The Islamic republic will resist without a problem," Mohammadi
said.
The UN Security Council demanded Monday that Iran end nuclear
activities including uranium enrichment by August 31 or face
possible sanctions.
Hardline Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday vowed
that Iran would not bow to "force and threats."
The West suspects Iran's nuclear program hides efforts to build
a nuclear bomb, although Tehran says its work is for peaceful
purposes.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez visited Iran last week during a
nine-country tour that ended Thursday.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
3 AFP: US imposes sanctions on Russian plane maker for Iran sales -
Fri Aug 4, 4:30 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States announced sanctions against
two major Russian arms companies and five other foreign firms for
allegedly providing Iran" /> Iranwith material that could be used
to develop missile systems or weapons of mass destruction.
The move drew an angry response from Moscow, which called the
punitive action "unlawful" and "unacceptable".
The sanctions, imposed under a six-year-old US law, targetted
major Russian airplane manufacturer Sukhoi, Moscow's state arms
exporter, Rosoboronexport, as well as two Indian companies, a
Cuban entity and two North Korean firms, the State Department
said.
The measure bars US government agencies from purchasing any
goods or services from, or providing any assistance to the
targetted firms.
It also outlaws the sale of sensitive military equipment,
services or technologies to the companies or any of their
subsidiaries.
The sanctions took effect on July 28 and will remain in place
for at least two years, the State Department said.
US officials said there were no current or pending contracts
between government agencies and the seven firms which would be
affected by the sanctions.
But it was not immediately clear if the move could jeopardize
some business relationships, including a joint project involving
Sukhoi and US aeronautics giant Boeing in the development of
civilian passenger aircraft.
Russia denied any wrongdoing and condemned the sanctions, which
came at a time when the two governments are already involved in
difficult diplomatic efforts to prevent Iran from developing
nuclear weapons.
"We consider such actions by the United States to be
unacceptable," the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement,
calling the move "the latest unlawful attempt to force foreign
companies to work by domestic American rules".
"We want to underline that Russia always limits its exports to
Iran to arms used only for defense and not capable of
destabilizing the situation in the region."
Sukhoi denied having any contracts with Iran within the past
"six or seven" years.
The sanctions were ordered under a 2000 US law, the Iran
Nonproliferation Act.
"They were imposed on these entities because there was credible
information indicating that they had transferred to Iran since
January 1, 1999, either chemical, biological, nuclear or missile
systems," Jim Kelman, an official with the State Department's
nonproliferation department, told AFP.
But Kelman would not provide any further details on just what
the firms allegedly sold to Tehran.
In addition to the Russian firms, the sanctions hit Balaji
Amines and Prachi Poly Products of India; Cuba's Center for
Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology; and the North Korean
firms Korean Mining and Industrial Development Corporation
(KOMID) and Korea Pugang Trading Corporation, the State
Department said.
Gladys Gines of the State Department's Office of the Procurement
Executive said the punitive measure would have no immediate
economic effect given the lack of dealings between US government
agencies and the seven firms.
"But it will obviously have an impact on any potential future
arrangements," she said.
After weeks of diplomatic jousting, Russia this week joined the
United States and other members of the UN Security Council in
voting for a resolution giving Iran until the end of the month
to suspend uranium enrichment activities that could help the
Islamic republic develop nuclear weapons.
But Moscow remains a major partner for Tehran, notably building
Iran's first nuclear reactor and agreeing late last year to sell
it 700 million dollars worth of surface-to-air missile defense
systems.
The sanctions could also complicate relations between the United
States and India amid controversy over a landmark US decision to
ease restrictions on Indian access to nuclear technology for its
civilian energy industry.
US officials have defended the decision in part by saying it
will advance US non-proliferation goals by bringing India into
the international mainstream.
But Friday's sanctions gave ammunition to critics of the deal
who complain that India has still not signed the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
4 IRNA: Iran warns crude oil price will top $200 if sanctions are imposed -
Madrid, Aug 4, IRNA
Iran-Sanction-Oil
Iran's deputy foreign minister, Manouchehr Mohammadi, warned on
Friday that price of crude oil will exceed 200 dollars if the
Untied Nations Security Council issues sanctions on Iran.
Speaking to reporters in Caracas, Venezuela, on Friday,
Mohammadi said imposing sanctions on Iran will emanate negative
consequences, the first of which will be higher price of crude
oil.
He added Iran will not ignore its right to peaceful use of
nuclear energy within framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
He noted that threats also cannot deprive Iran from its legal
and inalienable right to nuclear energy.
"Iran is ready to confront with any kind of probable threat and
sanctions," he assured.
The United Nations Security Council ratified a statement last
week, urging Iran to stop its peaceful nuclear program by the end
of August.
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: Petition against nuclear deterrent handed to Downing Street -
Fri Aug 4, 7:29 AM ET
LONDON (AFP) - An anti-nuclear campaigner elected to the
governing Labour Party's executive committee has handed a
petition signed by tens of thousands of people opposed to the
renewal of Britain's nuclear deterrent to the prime minister's
office.
Walter Wolfgang, 83, a vice president of Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament UK (CND), delivered the petition with more than
53,000 signatures to Downing Street Friday, and said there was
"no point" to nuclear weapons.
He added that he planned to raise opposition to the Trident
nuclear missile system in his first meeting on Labour's National
Executive Committee (NEC).
Wolfgang was famously forcibly removed from the audience for
heckling then foreign secretary Jack Straw during a speech at a
Labour Party conference last year.
Britain's current nuclear deterrent was set up in the 1980s by
then prime minister Margaret Thatcher, when the Soviet Union --
not global terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda -- was seen as the
primary threat.
It is based on four Royal Navy submarines fitted with US-built
Trident missiles which are due to become obsolete in the 2020s.
One of the submarines is always on patrol, but the missiles are
no longer pre-targeted.
"This petition makes it clear that people don't want a new
generation of nuclear weapons," Wolfgang said.
"They tie us closer to the policies of the United States, which
is questioned by an increasing number of people.
"They provide no defence for this country and could actually act
as a magnet for attacks.
"We need a series of international agreements to eliminate
nuclear weapons worldwide," Wolfgang added.
"Technically, that is now possible but what is lacking is the
political will because that is the only way the spread of
nuclear weapons can be stopped."
Replacing the deterrent is likely to cost anywhere from 10
billion to 25 billion pounds (14.6 billion to 36.4 billion
euros, 18.6 billion to 46.1 billion dollars), observers say.
Members of the House of Commons, Britain's elected lower house
of parliament, will be given a vote on whether Britain should
renew its nuclear deterrent, though it is not yet clear whether
Labour Party MPs would be allowed a free vote.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: US officials calm Indian fears over nuclear deal
Fri Aug 4, 12:37 PM ET
KOLKATA, India (AFP) - A senior US official tried to calm fears
of political groups that a controversial America-India civilian
nuclear energy deal would harm Indian interests.
The comments came as federal MPs in India's national parliament
hotly argued that the landmark deal could blunt India's military
nuclear capabilities and called for a resolution to put their
fears on record.
"There are apprehensions in India and in the US but we should
not worry about this," Richard Boucher, US Assistant Secretary
of State for South and Central Asia, said after arriving in this
eastern Indian city on Friday.
"We should only think about the final outcome of the legislation
which I am confident will be within the framework of what both
countries agreed."
On Wednesday, the US House of Representatives voted 359-68 in
favor of legislation, a first step for the US and India towards
clinching the deal which detractors in Washington say will start
a nuclear arms race in South Asia.
Boucher said the pact, cobbled together during a visit in March
to New Delhi by US President George W. Bush" /> President George
W. Bush, would benefit India.
"One of the reasons for the civil nuclear energy cooperation
agreement was that India gets clean energy and it does not push
on the petroleum reserves ...
"It is the beginning of a new relationship as the US recognises
India as a rising global power and one of the emerging five
largest economies of the world," he said.
Boucher is scheduled to travel to the capital New Delhi and meet
with politicians and business leaders on Monday.
Washington says the pact will also advance US non-proliferation
goals by bringing India into the international non-proliferation
mainstream.
Under the deal, India will open a series of its civilian
reactors to international inspection but keep pre-selected
military nuclear facilities out of public scrutiny.
India, which has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, conducted a series of nuclear weapons tests in 1998 and
then imposed an unilateral moratorium on further testing.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
7 Guardian: Comment is free: The limits of force
[Norman Lamont]
Instead of relying on military might in the Middle East, the US
should try talking to Iran and Syria.
August 4, 2006 01:01 PM |
Some commentators believe that Israel in the Lebanon is as
America's proxy, and that the real intended target is Iran. This
may well not be true. But the rhetoric of American politicians
increasingly focuses both on Syria and particularly Iran.
Comments by US officials may well overstate the influence of
outside parties on Hizbullah. Syria may be a supply route and a
safe haven, and Iran the financier and ideological ally, but
this does not mean that Hizbullah just takes orders from Tehran
and Damascus: Hizbullah is rooted in Lebanon's Shia Muslim
community, which is 45% of the population.
But if Iran and Syria do control Hizbullah as closely as the US
says they do, it seems odd for the US not to talk directly to
them. A state department official was recently quoted as saying
words to the effect that Syria may be the problem but Syria
won't act, and therefore talking has no point.
A key feature of US foreign policy in recent years has been the
belief that overwhelming military advantage, or the threat of
it, will always bring an opponent to heel. So it seems surprised
when other countries do not fall quickly into line with their
demands.
This is because there are obvious limits on the threat to use
military power: one, it can't be used everywhere simultaneously;
and secondly, it is demonstrably counter-productive when used
indiscriminately.
US foreign policy increasingly seems to have no conception that
other countries have their viewpoints and interests as well.
America's attitude towards Iran has been hugely affected to this
day by the US embassy hostage crisis of l979. But there is
little awareness in the American consciousness of Iran's
insecurity after the shooting down of a civilian Iranian
aircraft by a US warship, or of the 250,000 to 500,000 dead in
the Iraq war. There seems no realisation that if Iran is
constantly threatened with regime change, then it must be in its
interest to keep the US bogged down in Iraq; and to show that if
it is attacked, Israel could be threatened by another strategic
ally: Hizbullah.
US diplomats call it "joining up the dots" - the phrase they use
to describe the "sinister" contacts between countries that are
enemies of America. But if countries are isolated or threatened,
they will seek to support each other even when, like Iran and
Venezuela, they have little in common, or when, like Iran and
Syria, they have conflicting interests.
Many would argue that Iran could have made life very much more
difficult for coalition troops in Iraq. Tehran played a
constructive role in helping the US in Afghanistan by helping
the Northern Alliance and supporting the Karzai government; for
its pains it was shortly afterwards labelled part of the "axis
of evil".
After the invasion of Iraq the US refused to allow Iran to play
any part in the economic reconstruction of Iraq, although there
were may Iranian firms that could have helped, as they did in
Afghanistan.
Of course, Iran has contributed to its own stereotyping. But the
rantings of its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, about Israel do
not represent the view of most Iranians and probably not the
view of the Iranian government towards a two-state solution
acceptable to the Palestinians. . What Iran certainly does want
- and this is the purpose of Ahmadinejad's remarks - is to be a
leading power in the Islamic world.
The US denounces Iran for precisely that reason. But like it or
not, Iran is already a regional power. It has a population of
nearly 70 million and is a significant oil producer, and its
influence has been immensely increased by the US invasion of
Iraq and the creation of the Shia crescent.
As an article by James Dobbins in the current edition of Foreign
Affairs points out, when states are failing, competing factions
for power inevitably turn to neighbouring countries and external
sponsors. One may deplore such activity, but it is dangerous to
ignore neighbours and difficult to prevent them exercising their
powerful influence. When the US invaded Afghanistan, it was
careful first to secure the support of Pakistan, Russia,
Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. If it had announced its intention to
democratise all these countries it certainly would not have had
their support.
America has offered to talk to Iran about the nuclear issue, but
in terms that make clear what the conclusion of the talks will
be. What is needed is talks, without preconditions, between
Syria, Iran and the US about the whole Middle East, including
Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq. It is senseless to pretend that
these countries don't matter or that military action or
isolation will bring them to heel. America would almost
certainly discover it has strategic interests in common with
those to whom it blindly refuses to talk.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: 164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR
*****************************************************************
8 [NukeNet] APP August 3 Corzine says he's against relicensing
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:33:40 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Corzine says he's against relicensing Oyster Creek nuclear plant for
another 20 years
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 08/3/06
BY BILL BOWMAN
STAFF WRITER
NEPTUNE — In his most decisive statement on the issue to date, Gov. Jon
Corzine said today that he is against the federal government relicensing
the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey for another 20-year term.
"I don't think this should be relicensed for 20 years under any
circumstances, just
because there's been too much concern about breakdowns,'' Corzine said. "I
don't think you can give assurances about anything.''
"We have to be safe first, and intellectually honest,'' he said. "I would
like to know what the status of that plant is.''
Corzine made his comments during a meeting with the Asbury Park Press
editorial board.
Corzine's statement about safety concerns at the plant was disputed by an
Oyster
Creek spokeswoman, who said the plant has undergone "rigorous'' safety
checks by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Text Size:A+|A|A-
E-mail E-mail Printer Print Subscription Subscribe Newsletters E-mail alerts
RELATED ARTICLES
• Radiation barrier tests inadequate, critics say
August 1, 2006
• Testing at plant finds no leakage of isotope into area ground water
August 1, 2006
• NRC faults Oyster Creek staff
July 27, 2006
• NRC should use taxpayer funds to protect public
July 26, 2006
• Oyster Creek faces new challenge
July 26, 2006
• Nuclear accident would spur chaos
July 21, 2006
• Danger at Oyster Creek plant could bring disaster
July 13, 2006
• Oyster Creek environmental impact argued
July 13, 2006
Related news from the Web
Latest headlines by topic:
• Nuclear Energy
Powered by Topix.net
Advertisement
Partners: Jobs: CareerBuilder.com • Cars: Cars.com • Apartments:
Apartments.com • Shopping: ShopLocal.com
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy. (Updated June 7, 2005)
Site design by Asbury Park Press / Contact us
USA Today • USA Weekend • Gannett Co. Inc. • Gannett Foundation
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
9 [NukeNet] Global Warming vs. Power Plants, Part 2 (Jellyfish)
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:38:15 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
Jellyfish force one Maryland power plant to to temporarily reduce
output, jam others.
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/072006/07152006/206385
...Marine biologist consultant Dr Vicki Howe said the warmer waters
sparked an increase in plankton and jelly fish, which in turn
increased supply along the food chain.
A nettle-some problem on Potomac
Date published: 7/15/2006
By FRANK DELANO
An overabundance of jellyfish in the Chesapeake Bay is causing
problems for power plants in Maryland.
According to reports filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, jellyfish have clogged intake pumps three times this
month at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Calvert County, Md.
On July 7, an influx of jellyfish in a pump that circulates cooling
water forced the plant to reduce the power output of its Unit 1 to 41
percent of capacity. The unit returned to 100 percent production
after engineers cleared and restarted the pump, the NRC report said.
Masses of jellyfish also jammed water pumps July 6 and as recently as
Wednesday, but the plant's two units maintained 100 percent output,
the reports said.
Jellyfish are also causing headaches at Maryland's largest power
plant, the Chalk Point Generating Station on the Patuxent River in
Prince George's County, an environmental analyst said.
Pat Langley said jellyfish have clogged large nets protecting
cooling-water intakes. A local waterman is now dumping jellyfish from
the outermost line of the nets twice a week, he said.
"It's not a perfect system, but it seems to be doing a good job,"
Langley said.
Chalk Point is about 30 miles upstream from the mouth of the Patuxent
River. From there, Calvert Cliffs is about 10 miles up the bay.
There are indications that the annual infestation of jellyfish in
Chesapeake Bay waters is worse this year than in prior years.
Langley said he could remember no other jelly-fish seasons where
barrier nets had to be cleared as often as this year.
An online search of NRC event reports dating back to 1999 revealed no
jellyfish problems at Calvert Cliffs prior to this month.
Jellyfish are also abundant in the lower Potomac River, but less so
in fresher waters upstream.
That is good news for river swimmers at Colonial Beach, about 50
miles up from the mouth of the Potomac.
"Aside from a couple of little ones, we've had no problems with them.
They usually don't show up here until around Aug. 1," said Colonial
Beach Mayor G.W. "Pete" Bone Jr.
Across the Potomac in Charles County, Md., environmental analyst Liz
Spitzer said jellyfish have caused no problems at the Morgantown
Power Plant on the Maryland side of the U.S. 301 Bridge.
Marine scientist David A. Nemazie of the Center for Environmental
Science of the University of Maryland, said jellyfish are a "balloon
species" whose populations can explode under optimum conditions of
salinity and water temperature.
Ideal conditions for jellyfish often occur in summer in the
mid-Chesapeake Bay, including saltier portions of the Patuxent,
Potomac and Rappahannock rivers, Nemazie said.
He said jellyfish populations seem to be increasing along with
increases of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous in the waters
where jellyfish are found.
"Large, worldwide blooms of jellyfish are regular occurrences now.
They used to be rare before," Nemazie said.
A Web site maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric maps
the probability of jellyfish in the Chesapeake Bay. Its address is
http://coastwatch.noaa.gov/seanettles.
Jellyfish are not the only marine species recently to beset the
Calvert Cliffs power plant.
The plant reported Tuesday to the NRC that 150 to 200 cow-nosed rays
had died on trash racks protecting water intakes of both units.
"The apparent cause was low oxygen levels in the Bay water," the
report said. Power output was not disrupted by the death of the stingrays.
Staff reporter Rusty Dennen contributed to this story.
To reach FRANK DELANO:804/333-3834
Email: fpdelano@gmail.com
*****************************************************************
10 NRC: NRC Names New Senior Resident Inspector at Oconee Nuclear Station in South Carolina
News Release - Region II - 2006-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-06-036
August 4, 2006 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D.
Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in the Region II
office in Atlanta have assigned Daniel (Dan) Rich as the Senior
Resident Inspector at the Oconee nuclear power plant in upstate
South Carolina.
Rich joined the NRC as a Reactor Engineer in the Division of
Reactor Projects in Region III in June 1996. In February 1997,
he was assigned as the Resident Inspector at the Watts Bar
Nuclear Plant in Spring City, Tenn. In December, 2001, he was
assigned as the Senior Resident Inspector at Nuclear Fuel
Services in Erwin, Tenn.
Prior to joining the NRC, Rich was a U.S. Navy officer and
served on the submarines USS Houston, USS Salt Lake City, and
USS Casimir Pulaski.
Rich earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical
Engineering at California Polytechnic State University.
Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two NRC
resident inspectors. They serve as the agency's eyes and ears at
the facility, conducting regular inspections, monitoring
significant work projects and interfacing with plant workers and
the public.
Rich joins Resident Inspectors Andy Hutto and Eric Riggs and
Secretary Mary Jordan at the Oconee Nuclear Station. The NRC
staff at Oconee can be reached by calling 864-882-6927.
Last revised Friday, August 04, 2006
*****************************************************************
11 Knox News: DOE chief wants creation of new reactors
By GREG BLUESTEIN, Associated Press
August 4, 2006
ATLANTA — Trying to end a 30-year hiatus on new nuclear plants,
the nation's energy chief announced a plan Friday to sweeten the
pot for utility companies hesitant to build the next reactor.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman's plan will offer $2 billion in
federal risk insurance for the first six new nuclear power plants
built by utility companies willing to break the national nuclear
drought.
"I think it's time for the nation that invented this technology
to reassert its leadership," Bodman told Georgia Power Co.
employees during a visit to Atlanta.
There are 103 nuclear power plants scattered across 31 U.S.
states, Bodman said, but an order has not been placed for a new
reactor since 1973. High costs and debate over where to store
nuclear waste bogged down new efforts, and a partial meltdown at
the Three Mile Island plant in 1979 put an end to any further
plans for construction.
But with energy prices on the rise, nuclear power is re-entering
the picture as a way to generate electricity without churning out
greenhouse gases.
Bodman said 12 utilities are expected to file papers over the
next three years to build 18 nuclear reactors. The insurance
plan, outlined in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and finalized
Friday, would provide up to $500 million in coverage for the
first two plants and up to $250 million for the next four plants.
"This program is crucial, we believe, to reinvigorating the
American nuclear power industry," he said.
Georgia Power might take up Bodman's offer. The company is
evaluating building a new reactor at its Plant Vogtle site near
Waynesboro, Ga.
"It's a very long process. So in order to keep that option open,
we are actually taking steps right now that will at least allow
us to be in the running," said Georgia Power spokeswoman Carol
Boatwright.
Bodman's visit to Atlanta comes as a nationwide heat wave loosens
its grip, after setting record temperatures and straining
electrical grids.
"The industry has performed very well. The problem is we haven't
had sufficient investment. We are the world's biggest economy. We
should not have blackouts, brownouts, rolling blackouts. That
shouldn't be in our vernacular," Bodman said.
He said the 2005 bill will eventually help avoid outages by
forcing utilities to comply with federal reliability standards
for utility grids instead of self-regulation. "But it won't help
this summer or even next," he cautioned.
The legislation also sends billions of dollars in tax subsidies
to energy companies, yet does little to quickly ease gas prices
or lower America's reliance on foreign oil.
In the long run, Bodman said it will refocus the nation's energy
priorities and promote cleaner and alternative forms of energy.
To help achieve those goals, energy industries will get billions
in tax benefits. There are various incentives for consumers, too.
Environmental groups contend that the legislation places little
emphasis on energy conservation while rewarding energy producers
that have logged record profits.
Copyright 2006, Associated Press.
*****************************************************************
12 Daily Press: Victorville explores nuclear energy
Friday, August 4, 2006
City hires out-of-state law firm to look at options
By TATIANA PROPHET Staff Writer
VICTORVILLE The city has retained a Washington, D.C., law firm
to help Victorville push further into the energy business, with
the idea of eventually building an oil refinery and even, one
day, a nuclear power plant.
In late July, Richard E. Powers Jr., who specializes in energy
law, made a visit to Victorville to discuss options. The city
voted Tuesday to retain Powers, a partner in Venable LLP, for
one year at $5,000 a month to lobby and act as a liaison with
private sector entities and government bodies. Venable plans to
bill the city more for specific projects.
The city stepped up its energy pursuits after President George
W. Bush called for the private sector to work on alternatives to
Middle Eastern oil, said Councilman Terry Caldwell, and that
pursuit does not rule out nuclear energy.
The city is joining a revival of interest in nuclear technology,
with the emergence of "passive safety technology" and prototype
designs by Westinghouse and General Electric for smaller, and
some say lessexpensive, power plants. But the technology is
experimental.
For Caldwell, a nuclear plant is a long way away.
"It probably won't happen in my lifetime," he said. "But you
know the longest walk always starts with the first step."
Caldwell said Victorville wants to be in the vanguard of the
energy movement.
"We're out there, we're not just paving streets and building
parks and all those things that are important, we're looking at
ways to make Victorville not just the Key City to the High
Desert but a dominant player in regional and world issues," he
said. "And we have hired a world-class firm to help us in this
arena."
If a refinery were built in Victorville, it would be the first
in the nation in more than three decades. One reason California
gas prices are higher than the rest of the nation is that the
state's smog standards are too high for out-of-state refineries
to handle. Therefore supply is squeezed by a limited number of
refineries in the state.
"We need more modern refineries that can meet the emission
constraints," Caldwell said.
A nuclear power plant in California would have to leap many
hurdles, namely a law passed in the early 1980s that prohibits
any new nuclear facility from being built until the federal
government comes up with a safe way to dispose of nuclear waste,
said Claudia Chandler, assistant executive director of the
California Energy Commission.
As it is, California consumers are paying a surcharge on their
bills for storage of spent fuel that is waiting to be disposed
of at Yucca Mountain; a plan that has stalled in a tangle of
lawsuits.
"If they opened up Yucca Mountain, the nuclear waste that's
being stored right now in the nuclear facilities throughout the
nation would fill Yucca Mountain," Chandler said.
At hearings Thursday in Washington, experts said the earliest
the federal government might have a repository is 2017, said
Barbara Byron, nuclear policy adviser at the energy commission.
"They were saying it was an optimistic schedule," she said.
Tatiana Prophet may be reached at 951-6222 or at
tprophet@vvdailypress.com.
© Daily Press, a Newspaper
*****************************************************************
13 NRC: NRC Announces Availability of License Renewal Application for FitzPatrick Nuclear Plant
News Release - 2006-10 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office
of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC
20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 06-100 August 4, 2006
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced today that an
application for a 20-year renewal of the operating license for
the James A. FitzPatrick nuclear power plant is available for
public review.
The FitzPatrick plant is located approximately eight miles
northeast of Oswego, N.Y., and its current operating license
expires Oct. 17, 2014. The applicant, Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc., submitted the renewal application Aug 1. The
application is available on the NRC Web site at this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati
ons.html.
The NRC staff is currently conducting its initial reviews of the
application to determine whether it contains enough information
for the required formal reviews. If the application has
sufficient information, the NRC will formally docket, or file it
and will announce an opportunity for the public to request an
adjudicatory hearing on the renewal request.
Additional information about the NRCs review of reactor license
renewal applications is available on the NRC Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html.
Last revised Friday, August 04, 2006
*****************************************************************
14 DOE: Secretary Bodman Announces Federal Risk Insurance for Nuclear Power Plants
& Touts Robust Economy
August 4, 2006
ATLANTA, GA After touring Georgia Power and speaking to its
employees, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel W.
Bodman today announced completion of the final rule that
establishes the process for utility companies building the next
six new nuclear power plants in the United States to qualify for
a portion of $2 billion in federal risk insurance. The rule
will be available on DOEs web site soon.
Providing federal risk insurance is an important step in
speeding the nuclear renaissance in this country, Secretary
Bodman said. Companies that take risks and enter the market
first after a 30-year hiatus should not be penalized by hold-ups
that are not their fault. This risk insurance protects them
against bureaucratic and legal issues that delay their
start-up.
This risk insurance, which was authorized by the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (EPAct), will provide an important incentive to
begin the licensing and construction of the new nuclear power
plants essential to meeting our future energy needs, safely,
economically and in an environmentally sound manner. The risk
insurance covers costs associated with certain regulatory or
litigation related delays - that are no fault of the company -
that stall the start-up of these plants. Up to $500 million in
coverage is available for the initial two plants for which
construction is started and up to $250 million is available for
the next four plants.
Events that would be covered by the risk insurance include
delays associated with the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions
reviews of inspections, tests, analyses and acceptance criteria
or other licensing schedule delays as well as certain delays
associated with litigation in federal, state or tribal courts.
Insurance coverage is not available for normal business risks
such as employment strikes and weather delays. Covered losses
would include principal and interest on debt and losses
resulting from the purchase of replacement power to satisfy
contractual obligations. In formulating the final rule, DOE
evaluated and took into account comments received from industry
and public interest groups, including comments on the need for
greater clarity on how premiums for the risk insurance will be
calculated.
On May 24, President Bush discussed the importance of nuclear
power in Limerick, Pennsylvania. The President said, nuclear
power is safe. It is safe because of advances in science and
engineering and plant design. It is safe because the workers
and managers of our nuclear power plants are incredibly skilled
people who know what they're doing. For the sake of economic
security and national security, the United States of America
must aggressively move forward with the construction of nuclear
power plants.
Secretary Bodman visited Georgia Power Company in Atlanta, to
tour the transmission control center that services two million
customers across the State of Georgia and address Georgia Power
employees. The Secretary discussed the important role that
nuclear power can play in delivering clean, emissions-free
energy for electricity production. Expanding nuclear power is a
key component of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) that President
Bush signed into law on August 8, 2005.
The Energy Policy Act has set the country on a path forward to
increasing clean energy sources that will power our robust
economy for future generations, Secretary Bodman said at
Georgia Power. Through this important legislation, we are
expanding the role of nuclear energy and modernizing our energy
infrastructure, particularly our electric power transmission
system, to meet the demands of our growing economy and
population.
Secretary Bodman also discussed the overall health of the U.S.
economy, underscored by employment figures released today. In
addition to touting the 113,000 jobs created nationwide last
month, the Secretary discussed the positive impacts research and
development can have on strengthening Americas energy and
economic security. The economy has now produced 35 consecutive
months of job growth for a total of over 5.5 million jobs since
August 2003; 1.7 million jobs have been added in the past year.
These figures indicate that the American economy is strong by
almost any measure.
Secretary Bodman is holding events around the country to
highlight the first anniversary of the signing of EPAct. After
kicking-off the celebration with an event on Capitol Hill with
Senator Pete Domenici and Congressman Joe Barton, the Secretary
visited Illinois to announce $250 million for two new bioenergy
centers, which will accelerate basic research on the development
of cellulosic ethanol and other biofuels. The Secretary then
traveled to a wind turbine manufacturer in Cedar Rapids, Iowa,
where he highlighted the nation's efforts to improve wind energy
technology and reduce the cost of wind generated electricity.
Next week, the Department of Energy will release guidelines for
federal loan guarantees that will help spur new investment for
novel projects that will help strengthen our nations energy
security, and will also issue a study that will outline
congestion points in the electricity transmission grid to help
guide further transmission line construction.
Media contact(s): Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 | e/General
*****************************************************************
15 Platts: US DOE completes final rule on nuclear plant risk insurance
Washington (Platts)--4Aug2006
US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman on Friday said the agency has
completed a final rule establishing a process under which
utilities building the next six new nuclear power plants in the
country can qualify for a portion of $2 billion in federal risk
insurance.
"Providing federal risk insurance is an important step in
speeding the nuclear renaissance in this country," Bodman said.
"Companies that take risks and enter the market first after a
30-year hiatus should not be penalized by hold-ups that are not
their fault. This risk insurance protects them against
bureaucratic and legal issues that delay their start-up."
The Department of Energy said the insurance, which was
authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, will provide an
incentive to begin the licensing and construction of the new
nuclear power plants.
The risk insurance covers costs associated with certain
regulatory or litigation-related delays--that are no fault of the
company--that stall the start-up of these plants, DOE said. Up to
$500 million in coverage is available for the initial two plants
for which construction is started and up to $250 million is
available for the next four plants.
Events that would be covered by the risk insurance include
delays associated with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission review
of inspections, tests, analyses and acceptance criteria or other
licensing schedule delays as well as certain delays associated
with litigation in federal, state or tribal courts. Insurance
coverage is not available for normal business risks such as
employment strikes and weather delays. Covered losses would
include principal and interest on debt and losses resulting from
the purchase of replacement power to satisfy contractual
obligations.
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill
Companies]
*****************************************************************
16 The Local: Left Party demands nuclear shutdown
[The Local: Sweden's news in English]
Published: 4th August 2006 09:53 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=4515
As Sweden's nuclear energy crisis deepens, the Left Party has put
further pressure on the government by demanding the closure of
another nuclear power station by 2010.
If the left block wins the September election, that will be one
of the conditions for the Social Democrats receiving the support
it needs from the Left Party, said leader Lars Ohly. He told
Svenska Dagbladet that there should instead be more investment
in wind and wave energy, solar power and biofuels.
"I believe it is entirely possible," said Ohly.
"Until I'm persuaded of the contrary, I'll see this as a
starting point for negotiations."
Five of Sweden's ten nuclear reactors are currently offline
after faults were found at two of the reactors at the Oskarshamn
plant in southern Sweden. Two reactors at Forsmark were shut
down last week while Barsebäck 2 was closed last year.
Ohly said he had no views on which of the remaining five
reactors should be shut first, but that Sweden should stop using
nuclear power by 2025.
The statement was welcomed by the Green Party's Peter Eriksson.
The Greens want to see Sweden switch off nuclear power even
sooner
"It's good - I think they should do the same when it comes to
phasing out the use of oil," said Eriksson to SvD.
Peter Eriksson was also non-committal about how many reactors
should be phased out if the ruling Red-Green coalition holds on
to power in September.
The support of the Greens and the Left Party would be crucial
for the Social Democrats' energy policy. Earlier in the year an
agreement between the Social Democrats, the Left Party and the
opposition Centre Party led to the closure of Barsebäck 2.
But the Centre Party has now agreed with the other three
opposition parties to freeze any changes in Sweden's nuclear
capacity in the forthcoming mandate period, with no new
development and no closures. More Politics
Local © The Local Europe AB 2006
*****************************************************************
17 APP.COM: Corzine a skeptic on plant, tax |
Asbury Park Press Online
Friday, August 4, 2006
Gov opposes 20-year renewal of Oyster Creek's license
BY BILL BOWMAN STAFF WRITER
In his most decisive statement on the issue to date, Gov.
Corzine said Thursday that he is against the federal government
relicensing the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant for another
20-year term.
"I don't think this should be relicensed for 20 years under any
circumstances, just because there's been too much concern about
breakdowns," Corzine said. "I don't think you can give
assurances about anything.
"We have to be safe first and intellectually honest," he said.
"I would like to know what the status of that plant is."
Corzine made his comments during an editorial board meeting with
the Asbury Park Press.
Corzine's statement about safety concerns at the plant was
disputed by an Oyster Creek spokeswoman, who said the plant has
undergone "rigorous" safety checks by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Located in Lacey, Oyster Creek has for some time been the target
of a coalition of environmental and anti-nuclear activists who
do not want it relicensed. The coalition conteds the plant is
not safe, among other things.
Oyster Creek is operated by AmerGen Energy Co., which is owned
by Illinois-based Exelon.
The governor said that he was "more troubled today than I was a
year ago at some of the things we see happening on a consistent
basis" at the plant.
Corzine said his administration has asked the NRC to commission
an independent safety study at the plant, but so far that has
not been done.
"If they don't do one, we're going to try to commission one," he
said.
The governor said his administration also is crafting an
evacuation plan for the site.
"There's going to be chaos there" if anything happens to the
plant, he said.
Janet Tauro, a Brick resident and member of a citizens' group
opposed to the plant, said she was "thrilled" to hear of
Corzine's statement.
"Gov. Corzine is an extremely intelligent man, and I'm sure that
once he saw all of the safety concerns from corrosion to
terrorism to lack of an evacuation plan, it only makes sense
that this plant should not be relicensed," she said. "Any
rational person would think this way."
Tauro said opponents to the relicensing "still have our work cut
out for us."
"We still have a tough job ahead, but it's easier now because
the state is on board."
Brick Mayor Joseph Scarpelli, an ardent opponent of the plant,
welcomed Corzine's statement.
"That's a huge decision on the governor's part," Scarpelli said.
"I am personally proud of the leadership role that he's going to
be taking in this relicensing issue."
Scarpelli said that it's important if the renewal is denied,
that the plant's workers are taken care of.
"We have to make sure that's all in place," he said. "There's
always been a question of the future of the workers and Lacey's
ratable tax base. Money for that has been set aside.
"You have to give credit to the environmental groups and the
grass-roots organizations and the League of Women Voters, which
made it very clear over the last few months about the safety
concerns that we have, the terrorism issue, the evacuation
issue," Scarpelli said. "There really is no way that we felt
this plant could keep operating another 20 years."
But 20-year licenses are all that are available, said Oyster
Creek spokeswoman Rachelle Benson.
"That's what the process allows for," she said. "There are no
provisions for five-year or 19-year license renewals."
Corzine did not say whether he would support a shorter renewal
period.
Benson said the plant's safety has been "extensively" reviewed.
"On just the application alone, we spent $7.5 million and 93,000
man-hours," she said. "We're confident that the application is
of the highest quality and that it's a sound document."
She also said the NRC conducts "rigorous" reviews during the
license renewal process.
"They've relicensed many plants, so their process has been
tested and proven to be a good process," she said.
She said safety "is the plant's highest priority."
"If we weren't safe, then we wouldn't operate it," Benson said.
"Our top priority is to protect the health and safety of the
public, and that's what we will continue to do."
Bill Bowman: (732) 643-4212 or bbowman@app.com
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
18 AFP: Greenpeace calls for worldwide nuclear probe after Swedish incident -
Friday August 4, 12:42 PM
[Greenpeace protesters]
STOCKHOLM (AFP) - The environmental organisation Greenpeace has
called for worldwide testing of nuclear power plants following
the shutdown of Swedish reactors due to an electricity blackout.
Sweden's nuclear energy capacity has been cut to half after
authorities shut down five of the country's 10 reactors, four of
them in connection with a potentially dangerous failure at a
nuclear power plant last week.
"Nuclear reactors internationally must be tested to make sure
they don't have the same construction problem," Greenpeace
Sweden spokeswoman Martina Krueger told AFP Friday.
The Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI) said Thursday it
had launched an investigation into the blackout at the Forsmark
nuclear power station on the east coast amid allegations that a
potentially catastrophic reactor meltdown had been avoided by
sheer luck.
Krueger said Greenpeace "was not the best of friends with the
SKI", but she said the Swedish authority's response to the
Forsmark incident had been appropriate in this case. "They
actually did what we asked them to do," she said.
Greenpeace Sweden called for the closure of all remaining
Swedish reactors "if there is the slightest doubt about safety".
The organsation said the Swedish problem showed that nuclear
power was inherently unsafe.
"This is a prime example of why this technology is inherently
dangerous, must be phased out worldwide and never allowed to
return," Jan Vande Putte, spokesman for Greenpeace International
said.
"It has proved that a simple power blackout -- something which
has been happening regularly during the recent heatwaves -- can
very easily lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown," he said in
the statement.
"A combination of safe, renewable sources of energy and energy
efficiency measures are the only sane solution for power
generation," he said.
Nuclear power accounts for nearly half of Sweden's electricity
production.
SKI told AFP it was treating the Forsmark blackout as a level
two incident on a scale from zero to seven.
Sweden has shut two of its original 12 nuclear reactors since
1999 as part of a plan to phase out nuclear power over the next
30 or so years, or when the reactors' lifespan expires.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
AFP
*****************************************************************
19 Prague Daily Monitor: N-plant Dukovany lowers output due to network problems -
www.praguemonitor.com
Jihlava, Aug 3 (CTK) - Nuclear power plant Dukovany in southern
Moravia had to cut output of reactors to 25 percent owing to
network problems in the Trebic area in the afternoon, spokesman
Petr Spilka has told CTK.
The fault in the transmission network of grid operator CEPS hit
distribution centres in Sokolnice and Slavetice, the latter
supplying Dukovany power all over the country and abroad, said
Spilka.
Power supply was limited for more than 30 minutes, he said.
CEPS spokesperson was not immediately available for comment.
Available information says the fault has resulted in hundreds of
blackouts in industrial companies in the Vysocina region.
Dukovany units started to cut output at 2:51 p.m., and the third
unit was disconnected from the grid at 2:56 p.m. All automatic
systems were operating correctly, said Spilka.
The units started raising output at 3:27 p.m. The third unit
will be connected to the grid in 24 hours, said Spilka.
Dukovany´s output had been reduced to 25 percent only once in
the past.
The power outage which occurred early last week and hit the
entire republic was caused by extremely hot weather and two
defects in the domestic grid, as well as problems in the grid
between Slovenia and Italy.
CEPS had to declare a state of emergency and lifted it a few
hours later. Large companies had to reduce their consumption.
vr/er
This story copyright 2006 CTK Czech News Agency.
*****************************************************************
20 SciAm Observations: Nuclear Loses Its Cool
A blog from the editors of Scientific American
August 4, 2006
09:55:40 am, Categories: Environment, Global Warming and Climate
Change, Public Policy, 504 words
One of the greater energy ironies of our modern era is that some
of the nuclear power plants we rely on to provide our
electricity in times of great heat don't actually handle that
heat all that well. The aging nukes that litter the U.S.--and
others throughout the world--require vast quantities of water as
part of their cooling apparatus. And that cooling water becomes
unreliable in the summer heat, just when we need the reactors to
be making as much electricity as possible.
Read more
© 1996-2006 Scientific American, Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
21 Guardian: Comment is free: Let's shut down, not melt down
[Caroline Lucas]
New nuclear power stations cannot reduce CO2 emissions, but
shutting down the National Grid will.
August 4, 2006 03:21 PM |
When you're in a hole, it's best to stop digging. This week, the
government was told there is simply no completely safe way of
dealing with the 47,000 tonnes of radioactive waste produced by
the UK's existing nuclear power stations over the last 50 years.
This was reported by , the government's own Committee on
Radioactive Waste Management. It suggested that the government
adopt the least dangerous approach: that the deadly nuclear
waste should be buried deep underground - following decades of
"interim storage" - to allow for intensified research to address
"uncertainties".
This will mean leaving a deadly toxic legacy for future
generations - and present a handy target for terrorists or
combatants in any future conflict. But apparently we'll just
have to take the chance, as no one has come up with a better
plan.
And yet the government refuses to see the hole and, as signalled
in its long awaited energy review last month, is prepared to
keep digging by authorising new nuclear power stations, adding
to the nuclear waste mountain. The issue of nuclear waste was
barely acknowledged in the energy review.
The energy review does talk up the issue of climate change and
stresses the need for energy use to produce less CO2 and other
greenhouse gas emissions. But this is an excuse to back nuclear
power rather than a serious attempt to tackle the most pressing
problem facing human civilisation today.
It's not serious because it can't work. Nuclear power simply
can't generate enough energy to make a sufficient impact on CO2
emissions, especially as the calculations don't take into
account the CO2 impact of either the construction of the plants
or the energy-intensive fuel extraction and processing. And
building new nuclear power stations, even if they could reduce
our emissions sufficiently, would be a terribly expensive and
inefficient way of doing cutting emissions. Four times as much
energy could be saved over the next two decades through improved
efficiency than we could generate by replacing all nuclear power
stations over the same period.
The energy review concedes that nuclear power alone can't solve
the problem, by calling for a "judicious mix" of new nuclear
power and the increased harnessing of genuinely renewable
energy. But this can't work either, as building new nuclear
power stations will lock us into a centralised electricity
system for the next 50 years, at exactly the time when
opportunities for microgeneration and renewables are stronger
then ever before. Nuclear power will also act as a magnet for
public investment - of both cash and political will - that will
stifle support for alternatives.
Rather than tie us into a future of new nuclear, oil and
gas-fuelled power stations, the government should be adopting
the solution that is staring it in the face: decentralising
energy supply. Moving away from the National Grid may sound like
a drastic solution, but a radical new approach based on energy
efficiency, conservation and renewable generation is surely
needed if we are to both secure future energy supplies and cut
the emissions that fuel climate change.
Our centralised electricity system is not merely a symbol for
what needs to change. Lost heat during generation and
transmission means we waste over two-thirds of primary energy
generated before it even reaches our homes under the current
grid system. Real energy security can only be safeguarded by
decentralising the electricity grid and replacing a small number
of large power stations with a large number of small, diverse
and highly efficient energy sources.
This is because part of the problem is structural, such as,
peaking oil and uranium supplies, aging infrastructure and high
maintenance and set-up costs. Also, existing grid-based
electricity supplies are vulnerable to huge power cuts such as
the recent blackouts in Italy, Sweden and the US.
A decentralised system, based on a mixture of renewable
generation technologies near the point of energy use would, on
the other hand, improve long-term security of supplies, cut
losses in power production and transmission, reduce pollution
and greenhouse gas emissions and create local jobs.
Decentralised energy is already a reality in some EU countries.
Denmark, for example, gets more than half its electricity from
decentralised sources, and Latvia, Finland and the Netherlands
between 35% and 40%. The UK languishes near the foot of the EU
table, with just 8% coming from decentralised sources.
By concentrating on looking for a quick-fix macro solution, the
government is missing the most obvious solution to the pressing
problems of climate change and energy insecurity. It should be
looking to those citizens who have already installed
microgeneration turbines and those councils that are already
requiring developers to build combined heat and power plants in
new blocks. The government must facilitate this on a much larger
scale before any contracts for new power stations are signed or
it will be too late for another 50 years.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396 Registered office:
164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR ·
*****************************************************************
22 NewsRoom Finland: Swedish nuclear shutdown prompts investigation at Finnish plants
4.8.2006 at 10:43
Finnish nuclear reactors would have coped better than their
Swedish counterparts did in case of a shutdown, Juhani Hyvärinen,
head of the power plant technology section at the Radiation and
Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) told the Finnish News Agency
(STT) Thursday.
Two of Sweden's nuclear reactors were shut down in Forsmark last
week and two more in Oskarsham Wednesday due to electrical
failure. The defective reactors are very similar to the ones at
Finland's Olkiluoto I and II, which prompted immediate
examinations of their ability to withstand similar problems.
"We reached the conclusion rather quickly that the Olkiluoto
plant would have pulled through better," Mr Hyvärinen said. "At
Forsmark they had to resort to using their backup reactors in the
end and not all of them functioned either."
/STT/
© Copyright STT 2006
News from Finnish News Agency STT
*****************************************************************
23 AFP: Sweden alerted IAEA about nuclear "incident," did not request help -
Friday August 4, 05:19 PM
[Greenpeace protesters]
VIENNA (AFP) - Sweden alerted the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) about the recent "incident" at one of its nuclear
plants but requested no technical assistance.
"On Thursday, 27 July, Sweden reported that an incident occurred
at its Forsmark 1 reactor... They rated the incident at Level 2
according to the 7-level International Nuclear Event Scale
(INES)," IAEA spokesman Ayhan Evrensel said Friday.
"Swedish authorities have not requested any assistance from the
IAEA," he added.
According to the scale, level 2 qualifies as an "incident," just
one step above an "anomaly".
It is less critical than a "serious incident," and far below the
level 7 "major accident" that was the explosion at Chernobyl in
1986, which projected a large quantity of radioactive material
beyond the plant's perimetre.
"Incidents" involve a "significant failure in safety provisions
but with sufficient defence in depth remaining to cope with
additional failures," in other words, a "significant spread of
contamination" or "overexposure of a worker" to radioactive
material, according to the IAEA.
The Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI) said Thursday it
would open an investigation into the incident.
Swedish authorities have shut down five of the country's
reactors, four of them in connection with a potentially
dangerous failure caused by an electricity blackout at the
Forsmark 1 plant last week.
Following the shutdown, the environmental organisation
Greenpeace called Friday for worldwide testing of nuclear power
plants.
Nuclear power accounts for nearly half of Sweden's electricity
production.
A source close to the UN atomic watchdog told AFP the IAEA "was
not alarmed" and televised reports speaking of a near
catastrophe were exaggerated.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
AFP
*****************************************************************
24 Decatur Daily: TVA says stored waste not a threat: Athens nuclear restart on schedule
8-4-6
Athens nuclear restart on schedule
From Staff, AP reports
Tennessee Valley Authority officials dismissed fears from
environmentalists over whether used nuclear fuel stored at Browns
Ferry and other nuclear plants poses a hazard to the Tennessee
River.
Browns Ferry, with more than 1,400 metric tons of high-level
radioactive waste stored in an elevated pool inside the plant, is
among the nation's leaders in onsite spent nuclear fuel.
"This waste is being piled up
on the river banks, and the river is the
drinking water source for thousands of people," said Stephen
Smith, director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.
"Couple that with the known terrorist threats, and it's very
discomforting."
The material is placed in an elevated pool until it cools enough
for the government to transport it to a permanent disposal
facility, but it's unclear when that will happen. The new storage
site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada was delayed again last week
until at least 2017.
Another 37 metric tons of waste are being stored outside the
plant along the Tennessee River.
TVA officials are not pleased with the delay at Yucca Mountain,
but they say the stored waste is not a public threat.
"The storage in dry casks is a proven, safe technology," TVA
spokesman John Moulton said. "(The Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
has licensed the storage facilities, so there are regulatory
checks there."
Waste also is being stored at other plants. Sequoyah Nuclear
Plant in Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., has a full storage pool and outside
storage. Watts Bar Nuclear Plant in Spring City will need
dry-cask storage in about 12 years.
The three plants combined store more than 2,500 metric tons of
waste and radioactive fuel assemblies because there is nowhere
else to keep it.
"We sued (the U.S. Department of Energy), as did many other
utilities, because they didn't start picking up the spent fuel,"
Moulton said.
TVA's lawsuit was filed in 2001, and a federal court awarded TVA
$34.9 million to help pay for onsite storage through 2005. TVA
has paid about $758 million into the Nuclear Waste Fund for the
building of a permanent storage site.
Nationwide, about 55,000 metric tons of nuclear waste are being
stored, and it increases by about 2,000 metric tons a year,
Nuclear Regulatory Agency officials said.
During a public hearing Thursday at Calhoun Community College,
NRC officials expressed an interest in the restart timetable of
Browns Ferry's Unit 1 reactor, questioning whether the schedule
allowed adequate gaps for NRC inspections at the plant.
Craig Beasley, spokesman for Browns Ferry, said TVA began the
process for bringing its third reactor online in May 2002, and
TVA officials said the restart is 90 percent complete.
"It will have a $1.8 billion price tag," Beasley said. "And will
provide 1,280 megawatts of electricity, which would power 650,000
homes."
Beasley said bringing Unit 1 online wouldn't necessarily
translate to rate changes for customers, but would provide
financial flexibility and stability for the utility.
The added base load could allow TVA to purchase less power from
other sources, Beasley said.
Copyright 2005 THE DECATUR DAILY. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
25 SFSS: Lauderdale importer gets 2 years in prison in radioactive cargo case
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
sun-sentinel.com
Posted August 4 2006, 4:15 PM EDT
MIAMI – The owner of a Fort Lauderdale aviation business on
Friday was sentenced to two years in federal prison and ordered
to forfeit two airplanes for illegally transporting Iridium-192,
a hazardous radioactive material to the Bahamas.
Harold Degregory Jr. also was found guilty in January of making
false statements to the government. In addition to prison and
forfeiture, he was fined $1,000 and will serve probation after
his release, ruled U.S. District Court Judge Adalberto Jordan.
As the president of H Import Export of Fort Lauderdale,
Degregory, who lives in West Palm Beach, was accused of
transporting the radioactive isotope Iridium-192 to the Bahamas,
according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. He flew the Iridium in
a twin-engine Piper aircraft in a container known as a "pig" and
then subcontracted the "pig" to a commercial airliner, without
the pilot's knowledge, to take it to Freeport, Bahamas.
Degregory never submitted the required manifests, the government
said.
On another occasion he gave customs a form that failed to
disclose radioactive cargo.
The governmen maintains DeGregory was one of a group of pilots
who conduct illegal commercial cargo and passenger flight
operations under the guise of private, non-commercial activity
with the intent of evading the enhanced safety and regulatory
oversight given to commercial operators.
The planes that were forfeited, two Piper Navajo, are valued at
$75,000 each.
Iridium-192 is used in industrial radiography.
Copyright 2006, Sun-Sentinel Co. & South Florida Interactive
Inc. Sun-Sentinel.com, 200 E. Las Olas Blvd., Fort Lauderdale,
Florida 33301
*****************************************************************
26 IPS-English ARGENTINA:Residents Face Uranium Threat in Water
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:31:49 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
ROMAIPS LA DV EN HE SC CV MD=20
ARGENTINA:Residents Face Uranium Threat in Water Supply
Marcela Valente* - Tierram=E9rica
BUENOS AIRES, Aug 4 (IPS) - Argentine judicial authorities are investigat=
ing cases of uranium contamination around the Ezeiza Atomic Centre, in Bu=
enos Aires province. A married couple who have been diagnosed with cancer=
have been accepted as plaintiffs in a related lawsuit.
The first complaint reached the judicial branch in 2000, when residents o=
f the area sounded the alert about possible =94poisoning=94 of the water =
supply with uranium, and blamed the nuclear facility for the potential he=
alth consequences for the nearby population.
=94All of the reports recognise that there is contamination, and all are =
valid. The judge will have to combine the results and reach a conclusion,=
=94 biologist Ra=FAl Montenegro, president of the independent Foundation =
for Defence of the Environment (FUNAM), told Tierram=E9rica.
On its web site, the organisation says it obtained a report by the govern=
ment of Buenos Aires province -- signed by nine officials and filed in la=
te 2005 -- =94in which uranium contamination of underground water in Ezei=
za is acknowledged.=94
The group also says the document, marked =94confidential=94, admits that =
10 of the 57 Argentine water samples analysed by the U.S. Environmental P=
rotection Agency surpass the maximum allowable limit of =9420 microgramme=
s of uranium per litre, with a maximum value of 34.5 microgrammes per lit=
re.=94
=94Uranium is radioactive and toxic,=94 and can lead to cancer and geneti=
c malformations, Montenegro said.
=94The oncologist told me that there is a direct relation with the uraniu=
m,=94 Antonio Rota said in a Tierram=E9rica interview. The 65-year-old su=
ffers from lung cancer that has metastasised in the ganglia. His wife, Be=
atriz Rodr=EDguez, 62, has breast cancer.
The Ezeiza Atomic Centre includes a radioactive waste management area, wi=
th a central deposit for =94special irradiated fissionable material=94 (c=
an undergo nuclear fission), and a fuel production plant for two nuclear =
power plants, where uranium is handled and stored.
The centre admitted to uranium contamination in two areas -- Campo 5 and =
Trincheras -- but assured that steps were taken to remedy the situation i=
n one case, and that it is in the process of resolving the other.
The area alleged to be affected involves three districts of Buenos Aires =
province: Ezeiza, Esteban Echeverr=EDa and La Matanza -- with a combined =
population of 1.6 million people.
Federal judge Alberto Santamarina entrusted an investigation to geologist=
M=E1ximo D=EDaz, who found that there exists =94important contamination =
arising from the activities at the Ezeiza Atomic Centre (present and/or p=
ast) that affected subterranean waters at a level that impedes their use =
for human consumption.=94
The Argentine government's Nuclear Regulatory Authority questioned D=EDaz=
's conclusions and expertise. The judge asked for a new investigation, th=
is time by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a United Nation=
s body.
The IAEA organised a study for which it brought in experts from the World=
Health Organisation (WHO) and other independent entities.
The new assessment defended the monitoring capabilities of the Nuclear Re=
gulatory Authority, but did not find a direct connection between the uran=
ium in the water and the activities of the Ezeiza Atomic Centre. It state=
d that cancer mortality rates in the area were no higher than the nationa=
l average, and that it had not detected radioactive contamination, but ha=
d found toxins -- from naturally occurring uranium.
The maximum level of uranium that the WHO allows in water intended for dr=
inking is 15 microgrammes per litre. The IAEA admits that the levels foun=
d in the area in question reach 36 microgramme, but justifies them in Arg=
entina's mining law, which allows up to 100 microgrammes per litre.
Residents and environmentalists reject that argument. The law establishes=
that maximum level for untreated water. But the rules for dangerous wast=
e sets a maximum 10 microgrammes of uranium per litre of water intended f=
or irrigation.
The Regulatory Authority says that with the 100 microgrammes established =
under Argentine legislation, there is no radioactive or chemical contamin=
ation: =94It is the law now in force.=94
Montenegro believes =94it is unacceptable that the residents drink water =
with uranium levels exceeding the WHO standards and higher than that of i=
rrigation water.=94
=94We are confident that the judge will not give in to pressure,=94 said =
paediatrician Valent=EDn Stiglitz, president of the Esteban Echeverr=EDa =
Association Against Contamination, a neighbourhood organisation that was =
formed around this contentious issue.
Now the judge will have to issue a decision -- and he will have in hand t=
he studies, and the testimonies of Antonio Rota and Beatriz Rodr=EDguez.
(* Marcela Valente is an IPS correspondent. Originally published July 29 =
by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierram=E9rica network.=
Tierram=E9rica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the ba=
cking of the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations =
Environment Programme.)
*****
+Tierram=E9rica (http://www.tierramerica.net/english/)
+FUNAM - Foundation for Defence of the Environment (http://www.funam.org.=
ar/)
+International Atomic Energy Agency (http://www.cnea.gov.ar)
+Argentina's Nuclear Regulatory Authority - in Spanish (http://www.arn.go=
v.ar/)
(END/IPS/LA/EN HE DV MD SC CV/TRASP-LD/MV/TA/06)
=20
=3D 08041623 ORP006
NNNN
*****************************************************************
27 Rachel's News #866: Nuclear Pandemic
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:33:59 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
.
.
The Minneapolis precautionary action training (Sept. 8-10)
has been given a shot in the arm by an anonymous donor.
More scholarships are now available. Get details
here.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rachel's Democracy & Health News #866
"Environment, health, jobs and justice--Who gets to decide?"
Thursday, August 3,
2006................Printer-friendly
version
www.rachel.org -- To make a secure donation, click
here.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Featured stories in this issue...
President Bush Clears the Way for a Global Nuclear Expansion
In recent months, President Bush has reversed long-standing U.S.
policies, intending to expand nuclear power world-wide. This
inevitably expands the threat from nuclear weapons.
Anxiety Rises as Paychecks Trail Inflation
"Since peaking in 2003, the real hourly pay of the median worker
has fallen about 2 percent. The decline has been closer to 4 percent
for people in the upper-middle part of the wage distribution and for
those toward the bottom. In essence, most Americans have not been
receiving cost-of-living raises, and the national mood seems to be
shifting as a result."
The Cancer Risk from Trichloroethylene (TCE) Is Rising, Study Finds
Trichloroethylene, or TCE, is commonly found in drinking water,
air, and soil. A new report from the National Research Council says
evidence is growing that TCE causes cancer. What are
the
implications?
Interview with Howard Zinn
"A profound and fundamental change in the economic system of this
country is a necessary, although not sufficient, requirement for
seriously addressing and diminishing racism."
Editorial: Risk Assessment Is the Main Tool for Deregulation
The White House is working overtime to roll-back, ignore, and grid-
lock environmental regulation in the U.S. Risk assessment is the
center piece of the plan.
Climate Change and Social Change
The movement to avoid catastrophic climate change will include a
clean energy revolution -- greatly improved energy efficiency and
energy conservation. We need a new democracy movement to make it
possible for governments, local and national, to take corrective
action on climate change.
Protest and Rally Demanding Climate Justice -- Aug. 26
A protest and rally demanding climate justice will occur Saturday
August 26, 2006 in the Washington D.C area. Organized by the Climate
Emergency Council and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: Rachel's Democracy & Health News #866, Aug. 3, 2006
[Printer-friendly
version]
PRESIDENT BUSH CLEARS THE WAY FOR A GLOBAL NUCLEAR EXPANSION
By Peter Montague
President Bush has said many times that nuclear weapons are the
greatest threat to U.S. security, particularly nuclear weapons in the
hands of hostile groups, like Al Qaeda, or unstable governments.
The tight connection between nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants
is well-understood, unmistakable and unavoidable. People who want to
build nuclear weapons almost always start by building a nuclear power
plant. Israel developed a nuclear arsenal starting with components and
know-how provided by a nuclear power plant. India did the same. So did
India's chief rival, Pakistan. So did India's other major rival,
China. So did North Korea, using reactors provided by China and by
Switzerland. Iraq was building the Osiraq nuclear power plant until
1981 when Israel blew it to smithereens to prevent the next logical
step, an Iraqi A-bomb. Iran is reportedly heading down this same path
now, starting with nuclear reactors provided by our ally, Russia.
Despite the clear, tight connection between nuclear power plants and
nuclear weapons, and despite the President's oft-repeated warning that
the greatest threat to our national security is an atomic bomb in the
wrong hands, the President is now taking very aggressive steps to
expand the number of nuclear power plants worldwide.
In February, Mr. Bush announced a major new U.S. program to sell
nuclear power plants all around the world. The President's program is
called the
Global
Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). An important
first step in the GNEP is to build many more nuclear power plants in
the U.S. -- a "nuclear renaissance," as it is being called in nuclear
industry puff pieces, such as
this one from the
New York Times.
To build more nuclear plants in the U.S., the problem of nuclear waste
disposal must be solved and the GNEP offers two ways to do this, a
long term solution and a short term solution.
The problem is
highly-radioactive
reactor fuel. To fuel a reactor,
slightly-enriched uranium is formed into pellets, which are then
packed into long rods. When these rods are placed close to each other
in the core of a reactor, the uranium in the rods undergoes a
controlled chain reaction, producing heat plus new "fission products"
that are intensely radioactive, including plutonium. Eventually these
unwanted fission products "poison" the chain reaction and the fuel
must be withdrawn from the reactor and replaced. The poisoned fuel
rods become "high level radioactive waste" and they must be held
securely for upwards of 240,000 years. Because our species, homo
sapiens, has only been on the planet for roughly 100,000 years, we
have no experience handling long-lived, highly-dangerous problems of
this nature. We are flying blind. Scientists have been working on the
nuclear waste problem since 1940; however, after 66 years of intense
effort, there is still no satisfactory solution in sight.
The current plan for handling these wastes is to bury them in a hole
in the ground beneath the Nevada desert at a place called Yucca
Mountain. Unfortunately, the Yucca Mountain waste dump has been mired
in problems, including
falsification
of data by scientists of the
U.S. Geological Survey. The Yucca Mountain dump was supposed to open
in 1998, but the government now says
there
is no way to estimate when
the site will be opened because of the many problems it has
encountered. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Energy now acknowledges
that by 2010 -- 4 years from now -- the existing nuclear power plants
in the U.S. will have produced enough high-level waste to
fill the
Yucca Mountain dump completely. Yucca Mountain will need to be
expanded, or a second high-level waste dump will have to be built, and
the government has not announced any plans for a second waste dump.
Without some solution to this waste problem, nuclear power cannot
readily expand in the U.S.
A group of private utilities calling itself Private Fuel Storage (PFS)
has devised a solution to the high-level waste problem -- "temporary"
storage of up to 100 years on Goshute Indian land in Skull Valley,
Utah. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
issued
a license to PFS in
March, but the State of Utah is not enthusiastic about the project, to
put it mildly, and numerous stumbling blocks remain, preventing PFS
from accepting any wastes.
So how can the domestic U.S nuclear industry expand?
The long-term solution to the problem of irradiated reactor fuel is
embodied in President Bush's GNEP plan -- to develop an entirely new
set of machines and processes called an
"advanced
fuel cycle" to
"reprocess" and "recycle" the irradiated reactor fuel, and reduce the
volume of waste produced by each nuclear power plant, using complex
machines ("fast reactors") and
technologies that do not exist today.
At a
Congressional hearing on the "advanced fuel cycle" in April,
members of Congress estimated that the GNEP could cost upwards of $200
billion. "This would put GNEP in the realm of the U.S. space program
in terms of long-term cost," said Representative Al Green (D-Tex.). It
seems clear that Mr. Bush and his friends at General Electric and
Westinghouse -- the only U.S. firms that still manufacture nuclear
power plants -- are serious about tapping the taxpayer in a major way
to make this global business venture work for them.
Obviously an expensive and experimental program of this nature can
expect to encounter significant delays (not to mention cost overruns).
Even optimistic estimates have the first test machines starting to
operate around 2014 to 2019, so this will not solve the growing high-
level waste problem, which is already preventing the U.S. nuclear
industry from expanding.
So some other short-term solution is needed.
As luck would have it, the President's GNEP provides the solution. As
a first step toward implementing GNEP, President Bush announced July 8
that he has decided to permit "extensive U.S. civilian nuclear
cooperation with Russia for the first time... reversing decades of
bipartisan policy," the
Washington
Post reported.
The Post noted that Mr. Bush had resisted such a move for years,
insisting that Russia first stop building a nuclear power station for
Iran near the Persian Gulf. But the administration has changed its
mind, now viewing Mr. Putin, Russia's leader, as a "more constructive
partner" in trying to pressure Iran to abandon plans for making A-
bombs.
Now here's the important part: The Post pointed out that, a nuclear
cooperation agreement would clear the way for Russia to import and
store thousands of tons of spent nuclear fuel from U.S.-supplied
reactors around the world. The Post says this is a critical component
of Mr. Bush's plan to spread civilian nuclear energy to power-hungry
countries everywhere on earth because Russia would provide a place to
send the used radioactive material. Under this scenario, it doesn't
matter if the long-term solution ("fast reactors" and all the rest)
ever develops -- Russia will become the world's permanent waste dump.
The Post noted that some people have criticized Russia's plan to turn
itself into the world's nuclear waste dump because Russia has a
miserable record of nuclear accidents and horrendous widespread
contamination from nuclear wastes. Its transportation network is
antiquated and inadequate for moving vast quantities of radioactive
material. And the country has not fully secured the nuclear facilities
it already has against theft or accidents. Not to mention that it has
recently been supplying nuclear technology to Iran.
Never mind all that. The Post summarizes: Mr. Bush's new Global
Nuclear Energy Partnership envisions promoting civilian nuclear power
around the world and eventually finding a way to reprocess spent fuel
without the danger of leaving behind material that could be used for
bombs. Until such technology is developed, Mr. Bush needs someplace to
store the spent fuel from overseas, and Russia is the only volunteer.
So there you have it. Mr. Bush has a grand plan for placing nuclear
power plants around the globe in every country that wants one. There
used to be a major hurdle blocking such proliferation of A-plants,
called the Non-Proliferation Treaty. ("Proliferation" is the official
term for spreading A-bomb-making capabilities from country to
country.) Countries that want nuclear power plants used to have to
sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), promising not to make any
nuclear weapons. The NPT was standing in the way of Mr. Bush's grand
plan for a nuke in every country that wants one, so earlier this year
he quashed the NPT with great fanfare by announcing that he was
ignoring it. He signed a deal providing U.S. nuclear power technology
to India -- a nation that has pointedly never signed the NPT. As the
New York Times observed, the President has turned the NPT
"into
Swiss
cheese."
In direct violation of the NPT, India will now receive
nuclear fuel from the U.S., freeing India's home-made nuclear fuel for
diversion into A-bombs -- the very situation the NPT was designed to
avoid.
So the skids are now fully-greased for Mr. Bush's grand global plan
for a nuke plant in every garage. The non-proliferation treaty is
effectively dead, and the problem of high-level waste has been
"solved" by arranging for it all to be sent to Russia. To be sure,
some details remain to be worked out, but the outlines of the
President's Grand Nuclear Plan are now in place.
Only one major question remains. Why would President Bush want to
spread nuclear power plants -- and thus the very real threat of
nuclear weapons -- around the world?
As we search for an answer to this perplexing question, rational
thought fails us, so we turn instead to dark humor. On July 19, Mike
Peters, the Pulitzer prize winning cartoonist for the Dayton Daily
News ran a cartoon of three
Presidential figures -- Eisenhower,
Nixon, and George W. Bush. The banner above the three reads,
"Republican Campaign Slogans." On his chest, Mr. Eisenhower has the
words, "I like Ike." Mr. Nixon's slogan is, "Four More Years." George
Bush's slogan is "WW III."
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: The New York Times (pg. C-1), Aug. 2, 2006
[Printer-friendly
version]
ANXIETY RISES AS PAYCHECKS TRAIL INFLATION
By David Leonhardt.
Last week, as the Chicago City Council prepared to vote on a bill that
would impose a $10 minimum wage on the city's big-box retailers by
2010 and require them to pay health benefits as well, the big guns
came out to defeat it.
Mayor Richard M. Daley said the bill was tantamount to redlining,
because it would keep stores and jobs out of black neighborhoods.
Andrew Young, the 1960's civil rights leader, traveled to Chicago and
chided black leaders who supported the bill. Around the city,
Chicagoans could see a "Don't Box Us Out!" advertising campaign paid
for by Wal-Mart, and editorials in both Chicago newspapers denounced
the bill.
But it passed anyway: 35 votes in favor and just 14 against, meaning
that even if the mayor uses a veto -- something he's never done since
taking office in 1989 -- he may lose.
Meanwhile, in Colorado on Monday, Gov. Bill Owens signed a bill
requiring people to prove that they are legal residents of the United
States before they can receive government benefits or a professional
license. The debate over the law has dominated the news in Colorado
for weeks, a good indication that immigration will be a big issue in
this year's midterm elections and not just in border states.
The common ingredient in Chicago and Colorado isn't simply populist
anger. It's a particular anxiety that people have about their
paychecks. Whether the culprit seems to be Wal-Mart's drive for
profits or an illegal immigrant who takes someone's else job, many
families feel as if they're falling behind, and they're right. While
it can be dangerous to make too much of two isolated incidents, these
seem like a signal that the politics of the American economy may be
coming to a turning point.
Going back to the 1970's, the single best predictor of the nation's
mood has been its collective paycheck. For all the other things that
affect public opinion, like a war or a scandal, the power of wages
jumps out at you when you look at broad polling data over the last 30
years.
When pay has been steadily increasing, as it was in the 1980's and
late 90's, optimism has surged. But when pay stagnates, pessimism
about the country's future inevitably takes over. As Andrew Kohut,
president of the Pew Research Center, says, "When their jobs aren't
going anywhere, many people lose their optimism about the country
making economic progress."
There have been only three periods since World War II when pay
increases have fallen behind inflation. The first came in the 1970's,
after decades of healthy raises. The public malaise became so severe
at the time that a sitting president was moved to say, "For the first
time in the history of our country, the majority of our people believe
that the next five years will be worse than the past five years." A
year later, that president -- Jimmy Carter -- was unseated by the
Reagan revolution.
The second period started at the very end of the 1980's, and it left
many Americans convinced that Europe and especially Japan had passed
this country by. The worries fueled the fleeting success of
presidential campaigns by H. Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan and Jerry Brown
and eventually forced the early retirement of the first President Bush
and the Democratic leadership in Congress.
The third period of wage stagnation is now. Since peaking in 2003, the
real hourly pay of the median worker has fallen about 2 percent. The
decline has been closer to 4 percent for people in the upper-middle
part of the wage distribution and for those toward the bottom,
according to Labor Department data analyzed by the Economic Policy
Institute. In essence, most Americans have not been receiving cost-of-
living raises, and the national mood seems to be shifting as a result.
In the most recent New York Times/CBS News poll, conducted in late
July, people were asked how their children's living standards would
one day compare with their own. Only 18 percent said "much better,"
and 30 percent said "somewhat better." This is the first time in the
12 years that question has been asked that fewer than half of
respondents predicted that their children's lives would be better.
This fear, I think, explains a good bit of the desire to legislate
higher wages in Chicago and to keep out immigrant labor in Colorado.
Right now, Americans' view of the economy is nowhere near as negative
as it was in the early 1980's or early 90's, but there is a real
anxiety about its direction. Mr. Kohut said his polls showed a big
drop in the number of people reporting that they had made progress
over the last five years. According to the University of Michigan's
consumer poll, a stunning 57 percent of Americans say they expect the
next five years to bring periods of widespread unemployment up from 38
percent two years ago.
The obvious analysis is that this will help the Democrats, the party
out of power, and to some extent it probably will. Independent voters
are now nearly as pessimistic about the economy as Democrats are. But
the only solid historical conclusion is that falling wages will bring
some kind of political turmoil. Wage stagnation helped elect both
Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, after all.
Moreover, the complex reality of a growing economy that isn't
benefiting most workers will tempt both parties in some dangerous
ways. Many Democrats have taken to exaggerating the economy's problems
in recent years -- overlooking, say, the resurgence of cities, the
decline in interest rates and the benefits of technology -- and have
ended up out of step with the voting public. "This idea that people
are worse off than 20 or 30 years ago is so ludicrous," said Jason
Furman, an economist who advised John Kerry's 2004 campaign. "And
I've come to appreciate how damaging it is."
President Bush and his advisers, meanwhile, continue to talk about the
rise in average income, which is happening almost entirely because of
gains at the very top. Among their many attempts to talk up the
economy, my favorite was a chart released by the Treasury Department
showing that median household income had fallen since 2000 -- but not
by as much as it had in the early 90's. That's probably not going to
make people feel a lot better. So don't be surprised if the local
outbursts of anxiety in Chicago and Colorado soon go national.
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: Los Angeles Times, Jul. 27, 2006
[Printer-friendly
version]
CANCER RISK FROM INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL RISES, STUDY FINDS
By Ralph Vartabedian
After a detailed study of the most widespread industrial contaminant
in U.S. drinking water, the National Research Council will report
today that evidence is growing stronger that the chemical causes
cancer and other human health problems.
The
379-page
report clears a path for federal regulators to formally
raise the risk assessment of trichloroethylene, known as TCE, a step
that has been tied up by infighting between scientists at the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Defense Department.
California has some of the nation's worst TCE contamination, including
vast tracts of groundwater in the San Gabriel and San Fernando valleys
that are a drinking source for more than 1 million Southern
Californians. The state's 67 Superfund sites with TCE contamination
are clustered in Los Angeles and Santa Clara counties.
If the risk posed by TCE is significantly higher than previously
thought, it could prompt lower limits for TCE in water, as well as
stricter cleanups of hundreds of military bases and other polluted
facilities. The contamination occurred because TCE, a chemical
solvent, was widely dumped into the ground.
Already, some EPA offices are forcing tougher cleanups based on
evidence that the chemical poses a greater-than-expected cancer risk.
The EPA attempted to issue a risk assessment in 2001 that found TCE to
be two to 40 times more carcinogenic than previously thought, but that
action was opposed by the Defense Department, the Energy Department
and NASA. The Pentagon has 1,400 properties contaminated with TCE.
The Bush administration sent the matter to the National Research
Council for study, based on military assertions that the EPA had
overblown the risks. But the new report does not support that
criticism.
"The committee found that the evidence on carcinogenic risk and other
health hazards from exposure to trichloroethylene has strengthened
since 2001," the report said.
The report urged federal agencies to complete their assessment of TCE
risks as soon as possible "with currently available data," meaning
they should not wait for additional basic research, as suggested by
the Defense Department.
The report is to be formally released today by the National Research
Council. An early copy was provided to The Times by the Natural
Resources News Service, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit that
investigates environmental issues. The authors of the study also
briefed members of Congress on Wednesday.
"It is the strongest report on TCE that we have had," said Rep.
Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), whose district includes hundreds of homes
that have air filtration systems to eliminate TCE vapors from the
ground. "The fact that we have this TCE-laden drinking water used by
millions of people is abominable."
Hinchey and others in Congress are demanding stronger cleanup
standards and lower limits for the chemical in drinking water.
Currently, the EPA allows 5 parts per billion; that could be lowered
to as little as 1 part per billion for drinking water if the risk
assessment sidetracked in 2001 is adopted, according to an analysis by
the Air Force.
It would drive up cleanup costs by billions of dollars but potentially
save thousands of lives, scientists say. The report's authors told
Congress on Wednesday that they did not think the EPA should throw out
its 2001 draft risk assessment and start over. Instead, they hope the
TCE analysis can be completed within six months to a year.
Dr. Gina Solomon, an environmental health expert who served on a
scientific advisory board that reviewed the original assessment, said
the new report could have a profound effect on the issue.
"That is a very strong statement, a ringing endorsement of the EPA's
2001 draft risk assessment," said Solomon, an associate clinical
professor of medicine at UC San Francisco and a staff scientist at the
Natural Resources Defense Council.
Solomon said the report also rejected a key position of the chemical
industry and Pentagon environmental experts that TCE was not dangerous
at low levels of exposure.
Federal regulators should stick with the current scientific model that
the cancer risk posed by TCE is proportional to the level of exposure,
the National Research Council said.
In its report, the council found the evidence of TCE risk was greatest
for kidney cancer, but not as high for liver cancer. It did not study
other diseases that could be connected, including leukemia.
The report found merit in the Pentagon's criticism of EPA methodology
on epidemiology, which is the study of how disease is distributed in
the population. It called for a new survey of prior research.
The report from the National Research Council has been awaited by
communities exposed to TCE across the country.
"We can't afford any more delays," said Jerry Ensminger, a former
Marine drill sergeant who served at Camp Lejuene, where drinking water
supplies were tainted. His daughter died at age 9 in 1976 from
leukemia, which Ensminger blamed on TCE exposure.
Ensminger said he was heartened by the report's conclusions, but
remained concerned about whether the government would move quickly to
deal with the chemical contamination.
"I want to know why the Bush administration does not err on the side
of life when it comes to the environment," he said.
Copyright 2006 Los Angeles Times
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: Liberty Tree (Vol. 1, Issue 1), Oct. 1, 2005
[Printer-friendly
version]
TALKING ABOUT A REVOLUTION
Must we know when the revolution starts? Instead of looking, waiting,
observing, we should just act and it will gradually become obvious. As
John Dewey said: "Don't predict, so you'll know what to do. Do, so
you'll know what to predict." -- Howard Zinn
By David Cobb
David Cobb interviews Howard Zinn.
How did your upbringing in New York affect your view of the world?
I grew up in a working class family, in a working class neighborhood.
At the age of 18, I encountered young radicals, and worked at the
Brooklyn Navy Yard. I remember reading Upton Sinclair and Charles
Dickens as a young teenager, and Marx and Engels later. I went to my
first demonstration in Times Square when I was only 17, and I got
knocked unconscious by a plainclothes cop.
All those experiences certainly intensified my conviction that
something was wrong with this country! And it also intensified my
conviction that there was something fundamentally wrong with the
entire notion of capitalism. I also began to realize that the claim
that the United States was a democracy was -- at least to great extent
- a sham. That the rich dominated the country.
You were a decorated air force bombardier during World War II. Can you
talk about that experience?
I was an enthusiastic bombardier. I left the Navy Yard to volunteer
for the Army Air Corps. I wanted to fight against Fascism! I had read
about the totalitarianism of Mussolini and Hitler, and I had read
about the fight for liberty and freedom during the Spanish Civil War.
So you were a flag-waving American throughout the war?
Not exactly. There was a fellow I became pretty good friends with who
introduced the first jarring note into my certainty that this was a
just war. He was the first person I heard who described it as an
"Imperialist War." He argued that both sides were actually ruled by
powerful economic interests, and claimed that the governments of all
the countries were openly hostile to the working people in their own
country.
But the truth is that it wasn't until after the war, when I was
reflecting on my own experience in bombing a small French village on
the Atlantic coast, that I began to put the pieces together. This was
only a few weeks before the end of the war, and a totally unnecessary
bombing from a military point of view. And the reality is that I
dropped napalm on a untold number of Germans and French, including
civilians. This lead me to ponder the very nature of war itself.
Reading John Hershey on Hiroshima made me think further. And as I
observed the post-war world, and watched the Cold War unfold as two
superpowers armed themselves to the teeth with nuclear weapons, it
made me wonder about the 50 million people that had "died for
democracy." I thought about the huge numbers of civilians that had
been killed in the bombings of Germany and Japan.
Don't get me wrong, I was and am still am convinced that Fascism had
to be stopped. But I began to wonder if a war with over 50 million
dead, leaving the world still in such a dangerous state, with
totalitarian states in so many countries in the world, was really the
best way to fight fascism.
And over time I simply became convinced that war itself is simply an
outmoded and unnecessary solution to whatever problems the world may
face. So I was an early and adamant opponent of the war in Vietnam,
and against every war since.
That leads me to my next question, Howard. You were an active
participant in both the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements.
What can we learn from those prior struggles?
Well, I learned that when ordinary people resist oppression it is
mostly ignored by the contemporary corporate media, and it is
definitely ignored by traditional history textbooks. So I think we
have a responsibility to future generations to document those
struggles.
I also learned that important social change does not come from the
initiative of governments, but from the organization and agitation of
people's movements. And that lesson is repeatedly corroborated by
studying the history of this country.
Throughout your career as a historian you have provided a scathing
indictment of many -- if not most -- of the traditional American
"heroes." Who are some of the folks you admire?
Granted, it is good to have historical figures we can admire and
emulate. And such people certainly exist. But it is just silly to hold
up as models the fifty-five rich, white men who drafted the
Constitution as a way of establishing a government that would protect
the interests of their class -- slaveholders, merchants, bondholders,
land speculators.
Our country is full of heroic people who are not presidents or
military leaders or Wall Street wizards, but who are doing something
to keep alive the spirit of resistance to injustice and war. Today I
think of Kathy Kelly and all those other people of Voices in the
Wilderness, who, in defiance of federal law, have traveled to Iraq
over a dozen times to bring food and medicine to people suffering
under the U.S.-imposed sanctions.
I think also of the thousands of students on over a hundred college
campuses across the country who are currently protesting the Iraq War
or their universities' connection with sweatshop produced apparel.
These are the people who give me hope and inspiration.
I've often heard you reference the famous George Orwell observation
that "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the
present controls the past." Could you talk about that.
It is more true today than when Orwell said it! Those in power quite
literally control the past because they actually control the writing
of the history books. Conscious decisions are made to omit the actions
of ordinary people.
Those in power own the media -- print, radio and television -- and
they intentionally fail to provide the public with the basic sense of
history that would equip the ordinary citizen to understand government
policies or how those polices are even made.
By omitting the struggles of people's movements from history, they
convey the idea that all we can do as citizens is to vote for a savior
in one of the major parties. In short, media is designed to reduce us
to passive recipients of whatever action the government wants to take.
And of course, that action is always taken at the behest of the rich
and powerful.
In light of the incredibly subtle but effective corporate media
propaganda machine in this country, what are the implications for
today's social change agents?
We must develop our own independent media that can provide news,
information and analysis without the corporate filter. And we did that
during the Vietnam War. Community newspapers and counter- cultural
papers sprang up in high schools and on college campuses. And we also
created the independent press associations like the Dispatch News
Service, which actually broke the story of the My Lai massacre.
And today we have the Pacific news network, and perhaps 200 truly
independent community radio stations. We have Democracy Now! with Amy
Goodman. We have David Barsamian and Alternative Radio. We have
community cable stations and alternative newspapers. We even have a
few radical columnists at mainstream papers.
Howard, this first issue of the Journal raises the question of reform
and revolution. What do you see as the tensions and possible synergy
between these two approaches to social change?
Putting off revolutionary change to some infinitely distant future and
only dealing with "achievable" reforms consigns us to the absolute
slowest pace of incremental change. Indeed, the pace can seem so slow
that it seems like nothing is changing at all, which drives people
into either apathy or cynicism.
On the other hand, disdaining reform and arguing that only radical
revolutionary change is meaningful is to alienate the vast majority of
our fellow citizens, and to miss the opportunity to help leverage
incremental reform into something deeper.
It is a serious question you are raising. How can we make immediate
and important reforms -- ending a war, stop racial profiling -- but at
the same time to move towards more profound change. How can we work
not just to end a war, but to educate people about the real nature of
U.S. foreign policy, the history of U.S. expansionism, and the
inherent and inescapable connection between capitalism and
imperialism.
We must not only oppose racial prejudice, but to point out and remedy
the underlying roots of racism. And we have to be willing to point out
that any system based on corporate profit will always have an
underclass. In fact, such a system requires an underclass.
So the reality is that a profound and fundamental change in the
economic system of this country is a necessary, although not
sufficient, requirement for seriously addressing and diminishing
racism.
Is it possible to pursue both reform and revolution simultaneously, or
are they mutually exclusive?
Not only is it possible to pursue reform and revolution
simultaneously, as difficult as it is, they must be pursued
simultaneously.
Can you expand on this? How does one pursue them simultaneously?
I always encourage people to look around themselves in their community
and find an organization that is doing something that they believe in,
even if that organization has only five people, or ten people, or
twenty people, or a hundred people. And then get involved, especially
with those groups that are committed to systemic change. This is an
admittedly "reformist" approach.
But if we are not educating people regarding the underlying
connections, if we don't create a consciousness of how power operates,
we won't be able to create the conditions necessary to help nurture a
non-violent revolution.
Is one or the other more appropriate to this particular historical
moment?
Clearly we must concentrate on the movement to withdraw U.S. military
forces from Iraq. But at the same time we must force our fellow
citizens to dig deeper, and confront the reality of the U.S. as a war-
making state.
To prepare to stop the next war before it starts, we need to be
talking about alternative ways of resolving disputes, and we need to
talk about creating a global justice movement so the underlying causes
of war are greatly decreased.
We need to be building the global movement that will demand the end to
empire, and a commitment that the wealth of the world will be shared
fairly and be used to meet human needs.
Howard, is it possible for you to envision a successful and peaceful
democratic revolution in the United States? If so, what does that path
look like, and what would it take to move down that path?
It's possible to envision that future, although it does take some
straining of the imagination and eyesight! I see it as winning
victories step-by-step. Stopping a war, reducing the military budget,
universal health care, re-creating a more fair and progressive tax
system. I imagine us concentrating on each of these until they are
won. And when enough victories are won, and if we have been strategic
and smart about educating and organizing while we work on these
reforms, there will be a sudden realization that systemic change is
taking place, and that a democratic revolution is underway.
You have been clear that you do not consider yourself a pacifist, yet
you have spent your entire life working for peace. Can you talk about
that?
To me, the term "pacifist" suggests being passive -- rather than
active -- resistance. This is a profound difference. For example,
think of South Africa, where a decision to engage in out-and-out armed
struggle would have led to a bloody civil war with huge casualties,
most of them black. Instead, the African National Congress decided to
put up with apartheid longer, but to wage a strategic and long-term
campaign of attrition. That was a very active but non-violent
resistance movement that used an incredible array of tactics --
strikes, worker sabotage, economic sanctions, and international
pressure. And most importantly for me, it worked.
Is violence ever justified?
I am not an absolute pacifist, because I can't rule out the
possibility that under some, carefully defined circumstances, some
degree of violence may be justified. For example, if it is focused
directly at a great evil. I certainly believe slave revolts are
justified. And, if John Brown had really succeeded in arousing such
revolts throughout the South, it would have been much preferable to
losing 600,000 lives in the Civil War. And it is important to note
that the makers of the U.S. Civil War -- unlike slave rebels -- did
not have as their first priority the plight of the black slaves. This
is sadly proven by the shameful betrayal of black interests after that
war. And the Zapatista uprising that has been underway in Chiapas for
a decade seems justified to me. But some armed struggles that start
for a good cause get out of hand and the ensuing violence becomes
indiscriminate.
Each situation has to be evaluated separately, because each one is
different. In general, I believe in non-violent direct action, which
involves organizing large numbers of people. Far too often, violent
uprisings are the product of a small group. If enough people are
organized, violence can be minimized in bringing about social change.
What historical revolutionary movements inspire your political vision
and practice?
I am inspired by the Paris Commune, by the anarchists of Catalonia
during the Spanish Civil War. I am inspired by the workers councils in
the Soviet Union before the Bolsheviks seized power. I am inspired by
the Hungarian uprising of 1956. I am inspired by the Cuban revolution
in part -- deeply opposing the concentration of power, the jailing of
dissidents -- but honoring the profound systemic improvements in
education, health and culture.
What historical reformist movements inspire your political vision and
practice?
Well, there is the abolitionist movement, the labor movement, the
women's movement, the civil rights movement, the anti-Vietnam War
movement.
Howard, the reality is that U.S. elections have never been very
democratic. What changes would it take to make U.S elections really
meaningful and democratic?
We need to change the rules in the various states so that third
parties have a chance to compete. Third parties must have access to
the ballot and to debates. We need to change our voting system away
from the "winner-take-all" system and move to proportional
representation. We need to equalize campaign expenditures. A system of
publicly funded elections would be a start.
Were the 2000 and 2004 elections merely "business as usual" or
something more?
I agree with you that every U.S. election is flawed as a result of the
monopolization of the electoral process by the two major parties. But
the last two elections definitely introduced a special corruption
because of the position of the United States in the world.
Thank you for speaking with us, Howard.
About Howard Zinn
>From www.HowardZinn.org:
Howard Zinn was raised in a working-class family in Brooklyn, and flew
bombing missions for the United States in World War II, an experience
he now points to in shaping his opposition to war. In 1956, he became
a professor at Spelman College in Atlanta, a school for black women,
where he soon became involved in the Civil rights movement, which he
participated in as an adviser to the Student Nonviolent Coordinating
Committee (SNCC) and chronicled, in his book SNCC: The New
Abolitionists. Zinn collaborated with historian Staughton Lynd and
mentored a young student named Alice Walker. When he was fired in 1963
for insubordination related to his protest work, he moved to Boston
University, where he became a leading critic of the Vietnam War. He is
perhaps best known for A People's History of the United States, which
presents American history through the eyes of those he feels are
outside of the political and economic establishment.
About David Cobb
>From www.LibertyTreeFDR.org
David Cobb was the 2004 Green Party nominee for
President of the
United States. He served as General Counsel for the national Green
Party until declaring his candidacy in 2003. His legal career is
dedicated to challenging illegitimate corporate power and to creating
democracy. In addition to his service as a Democratizing Elections
Fellow with Liberty Tree, David is a member of the
Democracy
Unlimited of Humboldt County Steering Committee, a co-founder and
member of the Board of Directors for the
Green Institute, and a
member of the Sierra Club's national
Corporate Accountability
Committee.
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From:
Nature,
Jul. 20, 2006
[Printer-friendly
version]
EDITORIAL: SAFETY CATCH
A bulletin issued earlier this year by the White House Office of
Management and Budget contains a number of recommendations on how the
different parts of the US federal government should go about assessing
risk.
(See
related story.) The document, when it is finalized, will
have an important bearing on how regulatory decisions such as
environmental rules are made.
The topic of risk assessment sounds arcane but is of vital importance,
especially to the United States' poorest communities. The poor have no
say in setting the rules but bear the brunt of most environmental
threats, including dirty water, polluted air and chemicals left behind
on industrial sites.They will suffer the consequences if the balance
of risk assessment is shifted in favour of the polluter. And if the
current draft is implemented, that's exactly what will happen.
The United States has pioneered the use of quantitative risk
assessments, which are now widely used around the world. The National
Academies has played a central role in setting the agenda for how such
assessments should be conducted and their outcomes incorporated into
the related sphere of 'risk management', whereby regulators and other
agencies take action in response to an identified risk.
The proposed bulletin would increase the range of circumstances in
which formal risk assessment would be required before government
agencies could take action or set regulations. It would also put in
place firm guidelines on how these assessments are conducted.
This effort echoes the legislation on risk assessment and cost-benefit
analysis that the Republican-led Congress attempted to pass in the
late 1990s. That legislation failed, opposed by moderate Republicans
such as Sherwood Boehlert, now chair of the House science committee,
who rightly saw it as an attempt to stifle the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration and other
regulators.
That legislation was, at least, a relatively transparent attempt to
roll back regulation, which at the time was an important element in
the Republicans' political agenda. The call for government to get off
the backs of companies and individuals had considerable resonance
then, and indeed it still has. But it is an argument that has lost
some of its political appeal, and it is certainly not being made in
public to support the White House's proposed risk-assessment bulletin.
Some risk assessments done by government agencies do fall short of
reasonable standards. Only last week, a National Academies panel
criticized an assessment by the EPA into the chemical dioxin. But
these shortfalls could be addressed without tying up the whole
government in a set of rules to be administered from the centre by a
small, heavily politicized office with few technical staff -- the
OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
It is not the first time the OMB has sought to reform the regulatory
environment through this office, whose recently departed director,
John Graham, was a former head of the Harvard Center for Risk
Analysis. When it proposed a strict definition of how the science
behind regulatory decisions should be peer-reviewed, the National
Academies cried foul, and the definition was relaxed.
This time, the OMB has asked the National Academies to review the
proposed bulletin, confident that such a review will endorse its
technical content. But the bulletin's technical content is not being
disputed: what is at issue is its scope, suitability for purpose, cost
and the effort that might be wasted in enforcing compliance.
The motivation of Graham, his mooted successor Susan Dudley of George
Mason University in Virginia, and indeed of President Bush himself, is
not really in doubt. What they want is not better regulation, but less
regulation. They should admit as much, instead of hiding their agenda
behind the mantra of 'sound science'.
Copyright 2006 Nature Publishing Group
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: Liberty Tree (Vol. 1, Issue 2), May 1, 2006
[Printer-friendly
version]
FORWARD THINKING
By Ted Glick
Forward Thinking
Since about the time that the worldwide Kyoto Protocol officially went
into effect on Feb. 16th, 2005, there has been a marked upsurge in
activism on the climate crisis. This is a very positive development,
given that global warming is real, it is having destructive impacts
now, as in Hurricane Katrina, and it is accelerating.
A January 29th article on the front page of the Washington Post put it
this way:
Now that most scientists agree human activity is causing Earth to
warm, the central debate has shifted to whether climate change is
progressing so rapidly that, within decades, humans may be helpless to
slow or reverse the trend.
Others, like Stephen Byers, a top aide to Tony Blair, think it is not
decades but years. In early 2005, a task force he co-chaired concluded
that we could reach "the point of no return in a decade." Leading
scientists, journalists and others in the USA and worldwide agree. As
author Bill McKibben recently wrote in an article for the Boston
Globe, referring to the works and views of NASA's Goddard Space
Institute Director James Hansen:
... so we go on burning ever more fossil fuel, and the earth keeps
getting warmer--as Hansen's monthly monitoring of 10,000 temperature
gauges around the planet makes depressingly clear. But the new high
temperature record isn't the real reason Hansen is so agitated right
now, nor the reason the Bush administration would like to silence him.
Instead, it's the messages about future change that his computer
climate models keep spitting out. Those models reveal a miserable
situation at present, but a dire one in the years ahead. In his
December speech to the Geophysical Union, [Hansen] noted that carbon
dioxide emissions are 'now surging well above' the point where damage
to the planet might be limited. Speaking to a reporter from The
Washington Post, he put it bluntly: Having raised the earth's
temperature 1 degree Fahrenheit in the last three decades, we're
facing another increase of 4 degrees over the next century. That would
'imply changes that constitute practically a different planet.' The
technical terms for those changes include drought, famine, pestilence,
and flood. 'It's not something we can adapt to,' he continued. 'We
can't let it go on another 10 years like this.' And that's what makes
him so dangerous now. He's not just saying that the world is warming.
He's not just saying we're the cause. He's saying: We have to stop it
now. Not wait a few decades while Exxon Mobil keeps making record
profits. Not wait a few decades until there's some painless new
technology like hydrogen cars that lets us drive blithely into the
future. Not even wait a few years until the current administration can
cut and run from Washington. We are literally in a race against time.
It is the responsibility of all conscious people living today to take
up this issue with all the energy and determination that we can
gather. Present and future generations of not just the human race but
all life forms on this planet are depending on us.
What To Do
Climate activists are pretty much in agreement that there are three
primary tasks which must continue to be supported and much more
seriously undertaken if we are to have a chance of avoiding this truly
apocalyptic future.
One is energy conservation: the insulation of homes and buildings;
switching to compact fluorescent (CFC) light bulbs; using low-energy
appliances; setting thermostat temperatures low in the winter and,
where air conditioning is used, high in the summer; using hybrid,
electric or other high mpg vehicles; recycling; and other actions.
A second is energy efficiency: Tightening up the way energy is
produced, distributed and used in industry, business and other
institutions. Estimates for how much energy could be saved in this way
range from 30 to 70 percent.
The third is a clean energy revolution: The substitution of wind,
solar, clean biomass, tides, geo-thermal and hydrogen for the oil,
coal and natural gas that are now being used.
Differences
There are differences, however, among environmentalists on certain
major issues. One point is over the question of nuclear energy. Some
of the more compromise-oriented environmental groups are willing to
accept nuclear power, even if unenthusiastically. Most groups reject
nuclear power as a viable alternative.
A second point of divergence has to do with the Kyoto Protocol.
Although most US environmental groups are supportive in general, very
few actively promote it. Many seem intimidated by one Senate vote in
1997. In the words of Wikipedia:
On July 25th of that year, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be
negotiated, the US Senate unanimously passed by a 95-0 vote the Byrd-
Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate
was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol
that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as
well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the
economy of the United States."
This bi-partisan dismissal of Kyoto was reflected more recently during
the 2004 Presidential campaign when Bush campaigned against it and the
Democrats consciously left it off of their platform. Other, more
radical environmental groups are critical of the Kyoto Protocol
because "carbon trading" is a main element of the agreement. Carbon
trading is distinct from "carbon reduction" in that the latter focuses
on penalizing those countries that do not meet their emission
reduction targets. These groups are also critical of carbon trading
from an environmental justice perspective because implementation in
the South has sometimes exacerbated economic injustice while gaining
only questionable positive impacts as far as greenhouse gas
reductions.
The year 2005 witnessed the emergence of a new group, the Climate
Crisis Coalition (CCC), which openly organized support for the Kyoto
Protocol even as they articulated in their Kyoto and Beyond petition
(www.kyotoandbeyond.org) that "we recognize the current goals of the
Protocol are too low -- and its timetable too long -- to effectively
halt the escalating instability of the global climate." It went on to
say, however, that "the Kyoto Protocol is the only existing diplomatic
framework through which the entire global community can address this
unprecedented challenge."
Over the course of 2005, particularly in relationship to organizing
toward the December United Nations Climate Conference in Montreal,
there was a growing number of primarily local, grassroots
organizations that adopted the CCC position and circulated its
petition.
Corporate Power
There is a much larger issue, of course, that is not just for the
organized environmental groups, but for everyone within the
progressive movement. That is the issue of corporate power.
The heating up of the earth began with the industrial revolution and
the burning of fossil fuels--coal and, later in history, oil and
natural gas. As economies have developed around the world, all of them
have relied upon one or more of these energy sources to fuel that
development. This has been true whether a country's economic structure
is capitalist or socialist.
At the same time, there is no question that the growing dominance of
transnational corporate power, backed up by military force over the
course of the last century, has led to the enshrining of corporate
profit as a societal objective irrespective of the impact upon
increasingly fragile ecosystems. Powerful energy corporations like
ExxonMobil and Chevron have used their wealth and power to buy
politicians who do their bidding, mainly, but not only, Republicans.
Is it possible to slow, stop and reverse global warming as long as
corporate power persists in its present form?
>From a strategic perspective, should the global survival movement, the
movement for a clean energy revolution, become more explicitly an
anti-corporate movement?
Prior to my active involvement on this issue over the last couple of
years, I would have been quick to say yes, without question. However,
I have learned that, as with many other things in life, it is not so
simple. The fact is that there are a growing number of corporations
who are not just speaking out about the need to curb greenhouse gas
emissions but are actually taking action to reduce their own. The
entire insurance industry is very concerned, for understandable
reasons, about the long-term threat to their profitability and even
their existence as global warming leads to more Category 4 and 5
hurricanes, major droughts and storms. Magazines like Fortune and
Business Week are carrying stories sympathetic to those calling for
government action to reduce emissions.
Of course, it is difficult to envision the overall corporate world --
the super-rich of the United States and the world -- being willing to
participate in the kind of fundamental social and economic
transformation necessary, and urgently necessary, if we are to halt
before that "point of no return." Corporate globalization is a highly
energy intensive process with the transportation costs involved in
shipping goods around the world. There is no question that we need to
move as rapidly as possible to decentralize and localize economic and
social life to reduce our need for oil and gas. Besides their clean
and renewable nature, an additional advantage to wind and solar power
is that their use allows people to get off the energy grid of utility
corporations and be more self-sufficient. This is absolutely necessary
for survival, an essential direction.
It is completely on target for climate activists to be explicit about
these issues, and to call into question the corporate system itself.
To the extent that this helps to build a stronger independent
progressive movement operating outside of the corporate-dominated,
two-party system, that is a good thing. But it is also consistent to
demand immediate action on climate change by individual corporations
and banks. There have to be many approaches to succeeding in the life-
and-death struggle to stabilize our climate.
Urgent Action, Grassroots Organizing
It seems to me that the urgency of our situation calls for two
approaches right now.
One is the organization of a visible political movement. This means
demonstrations in the streets. It means hunger strikes, nonviolent
civil disobedience, actions that underline the urgency of our
situation.
Sooner or later it has to mean a massive march on Washington, perhaps
combined with a mass nonviolent direct action.
The other approach is widespread and ongoing local grassroots
organizing, educating our communities about this crisis, linking it to
the need for more democracy, pointing out, for example, that a clean
energy revolution can create millions of jobs. We should be doing this
in 2006 in relationship to the upcoming Congressional elections,
demanding that candidates for office support a strong platform of
action to address this crisis and supporting those who already have
the right positions. We need to get more local governments to make
energy conservation, efficiency and a clean energy transition central
to how they govern. And we need a new democracy movement to make it
possible for governments -- local and national -- to take corrective
action on climate change.
No single issue is more important than this one.
Ted Glick is a co-founder and leader of the Climate Crisis Coalition:
http://www.climatecrisiscoalition.org
He is also acting coordinator of the Independent Progressive Politics
Network: http://www.ippn.org
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: U.S. Climate Emergency Council, Jul. 27, 2006
[Printer-friendly
version]
PROTEST AND RALLY DEMANDING CLIMATE JUSTICE -- AUG. 26
WHAT: Protest and Rally Demanding Climate Justice and Truth Telling
from the NOAA Leadership
WHERE: 1305 East-West Hwy, Silver Spring, MD 20910
WHEN: Noon -- 3pm, Saturday August 26
WHO: U.S. Climate Emergency Council and the Chesapeake Climate Action
Network
Friends,
Below and attached is information about an important action a month
from now in the Washington, D.C. area. The climate action movement
cannot let the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina pass without
visible action in solidarity with Katrina survivors and for action on
global warming!
We are looking for many more groups to endorse this action and help to
build it in whatever ways you can. Please let us hear from you!
One year after Hurricane Katrina
Demonstrate August 26 in the D.C. Area at NOAA's National Headquarters
Join Us As We Demand:
** Justice for Katrina Survivors!
** NOAA Leadership, Stop the Global Warming Cover-Up!
Katrina survivors and noted national leaders will speak. Activists
will read aloud the names of hundreds of people still missing from
Katrina.
Hurricane Katrina caused over 1500 deaths. On Saturday, August 26, at
12 noon, outside the headquarters of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Silver Spring, Md., let's join
together to remember and mourn for those who died while we demand
action on the greatest source of future Katrina-like disasters: global
warming. We will call for jobs, housing, health care, environmental
cleanup and justice for Katrina survivors. We will demand that our
government get serious about cutting the global warming pollution that
is creating stronger and more frequent Category 4 and 5 hurricanes,
according to scientists
Instead of protecting Americans, NOAA's leadership, in direct
violation of the agency's mission to warn the nation about "dangerous
weather" and "improve our understanding and stewardship of the
environment," is steadfastly ignoring or distorting the growing number
of scientific studies linking major hurricanes to global warming.
Their actions are placing tens of millions of coastal Americans at
greater risk of experiencing, over the coming years and decades, the
kind of catastrophic impacts we saw in 2005 when Hurricane Katrina
killed over 1500 people, displaced two million others and inflicted
$200 billion in damages.
If NOAA's leadership continues to violate NOAA's mission, it's time
for new leadership.
It's Time to Stand Up for Justice and Truth-Telling!
Initiated by the U.S. Climate Emergency Council,
www.climateemergency.org, 973-338-5398, 301-891-6844,
usajointheworld@igc.org
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Rachel's Democracy & Health News (formerly Rachel's Environment &
Health News) highlights the connections between issues that are
often considered separately or not at all.
The natural world is deteriorating and human health is declining
because those who make the important decisions aren't the ones who
bear the brunt. Our purpose is to connect the dots between human
health, the destruction of nature, the decline of community, the
rise of economic insecurity and inequalities, growing stress among
workers and families, and the crippling legacies of patriarchy,
intolerance, and racial injustice that allow us to be divided and
therefore ruled by the few.
In a democracy, there are no more fundamental questions than, "Who
gets to decide?" And, "How do the few control the many, and what
might be done about it?"
As you come across stories that might help people connect the dots,
please Email them to us at dhn@rachel.org.
Rachel's Democracy & Health News is published as often as
necessary to provide readers with up-to-date coverage of the
subject.
Editors:
Peter Montague - peter@rachel.org
Tim Montague - tim@rachel.org
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
To start your own free Email subscription to Rachel's Democracy
& Health News send a blank Email to:
join-rachel@gselist.org.
In response, you will receive an Email asking you to confirm that
you want to subscribe.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 160, New Brunswick, N.J. 08903
dhn@rachel.org
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
---
You are currently subscribed to rachel as: rogerh@energy-net.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-280243-68545X@gselist.org
*****************************************************************
28 The Australian: French nuke tests 'increased cancer'
This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP
From correspondents in London August 04, 2006
THE French Government has been presented with evidence that its
nuclear tests in the Pacific did increase rates of cancer in the
region.
A study by the French medical research body Inserm confirmed
the findings relating to people living within a 1,000-kilometre
radius of the Polynesian nuclear atolls used by France for tests
between 1966-1996, The Independent newspaper reported today.
"We have established a link between the fall-out from French
nuclear tests and an increased risk of cancer of the thyroid,"
said Florent de Vathaire, a cancer epidemic specialist from
Inserm said.
The study was performed upon 239 cases of thyroid cancer in the
region, and De Vathaire said it was "significant" that ten of
the cases could be attributed directly to the French testing.
At the time of its resumption of tests at Muroroa atoll in 1996,
the French government said there was no risk to human health,
and has never conceded that argument since.
The French government has not commented on these findings,
saying it will wait to see the final report, as this preliminary
report has been released in accordance with a promise to inform
the Polynesian people first.
Inserm has urged the French Government to fund further testing,
including upon personnel who worked on the testing program.
A lobby group of French staff who worked on the tests,
Association des Veterans des Essais Nucleaires, is pressuring
the government to act.
France conducted 193 bomb tests at Muroroa and Fangataufa atolls
- 1,200 kilometres south-east of Tahiti - over 30 years, 46
below ground and 147 in the atmosphere.
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
29 Sydney Morning Herald: French nuke tests up cancer risk: report -
www.smh.com.au
August 4, 2006 - 6:54PM
The French government has been presented with evidence that its
nuclear tests in the Pacific did increase rates of cancer in the
region.
A study by the French medical research body Inserm confirmed the
findings relating to people living within a 1,000-kilometre
radius of the Polynesian nuclear atolls used by France for tests
between 1966 and 1996, The Independent newspaper reported.
"We have established a link between the fall-out from French
nuclear tests and an increased risk of cancer of the thyroid,"
said Florent de Vathaire, a cancer epidemic specialist from
Inserm said.
The study was performed upon 239 cases of thyroid cancer in the
region, and De Vathaire said it was "significant" that ten of
the cases could be attributed directly to the French testing.
At the time of its resumption of tests at Muroroa atoll in 1996,
the French government said there was no risk to human health,
and has never conceded that argument since.
The French government has not commented on these findings,
saying it will wait to see the final report, as this preliminary
report has been released in accordance with a promise to inform
the Polynesian people first.
Inserm has urged the French government to fund further testing,
including upon personnel who worked on the testing program.
A lobby group of French staff who worked on the tests,
Association des Veterans des Essais Nucleaires, is pressuring
the government to act.
France conducted 193 bomb tests at Muroroa and Fangataufa atolls
- 1,200 kilometres south-east of Tahiti - over 30 years, 46
below ground and 147 in the atmosphere.
© 2006 AAP
| Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
30 Platts: Sweden's Green call for investigation into nuclear reactor safety
London (Platts)--3Aug2006
Sweden's Greens called for an independent investigation August 2
into the safety of the country's nuclear reactors, following an
incident at Forsmark-1 in which power supply was interrupted to
two of four backup diesel generators.
The Greens asserted there has not been a thorough nuclear safety
review since 1979, despite work done by the Swedish Nuclear Power
Inspectorate and various government commissions since then.
Greenpeace also said August 2 that there should be a safety
review.
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill
Companies]
*****************************************************************
31 Independent: France's nuclear tests in Pacific 'gave islanders cancer'
By John Lichfield in Paris
Published: 04 August 2006
For the first time, the French government has been confronted
with scientific evidence that its nuclear tests in the Pacific
caused an increase in cancer on the nearest inhabited islands.
A survey by an official French medical research body has found a
"small but clear" increase in thyroid cancer among people living
within 1,000 miles of nuclear tests on French-owned Polynesian
atolls between 1969 and 1996. The results, yet to be officially
published, are likely to bring a flurry of compensation claims
from civilians and former French military personnel who were
involved in the tests.
They will also reopen the controversy in the Pacific - and in
Australia and New Zealand - surrounding President Jacques
Chirac's decision to resume the tests soon after he became
president in 1995.
France has since abandoned all experimental nuclear explosions.
Florent de Vathaire, an expert on cancer epidemics at the French
medical research body Inserm, said: "We have established a link
between the fall-out from French nuclear tests and an increased
risk of cancer of the thyroid."
A study was made on 239 thyroid cancer cases in the region up to
1999, three years after the last French test. Only 10 cancer
cases over 30 years can be attributed directly to the tests, M.
de Vathaire said, but this was "significant" and enough to
justify further research.
He called on the French defence ministry to finance more
studies, including the examination of military personnel who
worked on the nuclear programme in the Pacific.
The detailed results of M. de Vathaire's study will be published
shortly in a scientific journal but the main findings have been
released in advance to fulfil a promise that the people of the
French-owned Polynesian islands would be the first to be
informed.
Officially, France has never recognised that its Pacific nuclear
tests could endanger the health of its own Polynesian citizens,
and that of other populations. The brief resumption of nuclear
tests at Mururoa atoll in 1996 was justified on the ground that
there was no possible threat to human health.
A pressure group for military personnel involved in the tests
said the team's findings should force a change in French
official attitudes. The Association des Vétérans des Essais
Nucléaires said: "France is one of the last countries in the
world to admit that nuclear tests were dangerous to health. The
United States has recognised by law since 1988 that 31 kinds of
illness, including 25 kinds of cancer, can be provoked among
people living within 700 kilometres (435 miles) of point zero
(the explosion site)."
The ministry of defence in Paris refused to comment on the
findings until they were officially published.
France conducted 210 nuclear tests between 13 February 1960 and
27 July 1996. The first 17 explosions, in the period up to 1966,
were detonated in North Africa, four in the atmosphere and 13
underground.
Between 1966 and 1996, France conducted 193 tests at Mururoa and
Fangataufa atolls in the Pacific (46 in the atmosphere and 147
underground). France has had to admit that some of these
explosions caused dangerous levels of radiation in the nearest
inhabited islands.
After two tests within 17 days in 1966, radiation at five times
the permitted annual dose was measured on the Gambier islands.
After three tests in 1974, radiation equivalent to the entire
permitted annual dose was measured in Tahiti.
© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
32 DHHS: Exposure petition from General Atomics
FR Doc 06-6682
[Federal Register: August 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 150)]
[Notices] [Page 44297-44298] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04au06-72]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention
Decision To Evaluate a Petition To Designate a Class of Employees
at General Atomics (Also Known as GA, and/or Division of General
Dynamics, and/or John Jay Hopkins Laboratory for Pure and Applied
Science), La Jolla, Laboratory for Pure and Applied Science), La
Jolla, California, To Be Included in the Special Exposure Cohort
AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gives
notice as required by 42 CFR 83.12(e) of a decision to evaluate a
petition to designate a class of employees at General Atomics
(also known as GA, and/or Division of General Dynamics, and/or
John Jay Hopkins Laboratory for Pure and Applied Science), to be
included in the Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000.
The initial proposed definition for the class being evaluated,
subject to revision as warranted by the evaluation, is as
follows:
Facility: General Atomics.
Location: La Jolla, California.
Job Titles and/or Job Duties:
Potentially worked in the locations:
[cir] Building 2 (Science laboratories A, B, and C).
[cir] Building 9 (Experimental Building).
[cir] Building 10 (Maintenance).
[cir] Building 11 (Service Building).
[cir] Building 21.
[cir] Building 22.
[cir] Building 23 (Hot Cell Facility).
[cir] Building 25.
[cir] Building 26.
[cir] Building 27 (Experimental Area Building 1).
[cir] Building 27-1 (Experimental Area Building 1).
[cir] Building 30 (LINAC Complex).
[cir] Building 31 (HTGR-TCF).
[cir] Building 33 (Fusion Building).
[cir] Building 34 (Fusion Doublet III).
[cir] Building 37 (SV-A).
[cir] Building 39 (SV-B).
[cir] SV-D.
Period of Employment: January 1, 1960 through December 31,
1969.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office
of
Compensation Analysis and Support,
[[Page 44298]]
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676
Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone
513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). Information
requests can also be submitted by e-mail to OCAS@CDC.GOV.
Dated: August 1, 2006.
John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc.
06-6682 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-M
*****************************************************************
33 The Spectrum: The 21st Century motto ought to be "Not on my planet"
St. George Ut- www.thespectrum.com -
Divine Strake - the detonation of 700 tons of ammonium nitrate
and fuel oil (ANFO) at the Nevada Test Site - has been postponed
while the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) gathers more detail about the test's
environmental impact.
According to the NNSA, Divine Strake will be a non-nuclear
explosion; all its effects will be local; and none of those
effects will harm humans. I'm not so sure. The test will loose
many tons of toxic chemicals. Since our planet's air and most of
its water are interconnected, Divine Strake's waste may travel
far from the detonation site. Even if it's not a nuclear
explosion, Divine Strake is a bad idea on these grounds alone.
The Divine Strake Revised Environmental Assessment (REA) dated
May 2006 states that Divine Strake will be in compliance with
all federal and state air quality regulations, but there's no
real way to confirm that assertion given the arrogant secrecy of
the Bush administration. In a tactful understatement, a Nevada
official told me that the NTS "does a lot of its own
self-monitoring." The Divine Strake REA asserts that all the
material used in the test will be "detonated" and that the
resulting cloud will "dissipate." That can only mean that
concentrations will decrease locally, not that by some magic the
debris and gases will disappear completely or be rendered
biologically neutral. Unless there is no wind whatsoever and it
rains right after the test, it is implausible that all the
combustion products of Divine Strake will stay on the NTS.
It is especially galling that the NTS once again plans to wait
until the winds blow northward to detonate the explosion. During
the nuclear testing years, some residents of adjoining states
were forewarned of the site test schedule, but Idahoans and
Montanans were told almost nothing - while receiving the highest
doses of Iodine-131 released from the NTS. Clearly, today as in
the past, populations downwind of the site are considered
entirely expendable.
Just what will Divine Strake put into the atmosphere? ANFO is a
mass of hydrocarbons. According to the REA, the test will
produce two tons of cyanide compounds, 25 tons of particulates,
a ton of hexachloroethane, a ton each of tetrachloroethylene and
tetrachloromethane, a ton and a half of phosgene, nearly a ton
of sulfur dioxide, more than 31 tons of carbon monoxide, seven
tons of nitrogen oxides, nearly two tons of chloroform, and many
other noxious compounds. Who wants to be downwind of that?
Some of these chemicals break down benignly in air or water.
However, several are persistent in the atmosphere. For example,
it takes about 30 years for hexachloroethane, a chemical used to
make smoke in military and pyrotechnic applications, to migrate
out of the lower atmosphere into the stratosphere.
Tetrachloromethane, formerly used in dry cleaning and
refrigeration, stays in the atmosphere for 30-50 years and has
been detected at the South Pole. The National Toxicology Program
rates both hexachloroethane and tetrachloroethylene, the latter
also a dry cleaning solvent and metal degreaser, as "reasonably
anticipated to be a human carcinogen." Phosgene was used as a
chemical weapon in World War I. Sulfur dioxide is the cause of
acid rain.
It is true that the chemicals released by Divine Strake will be
diluted in the air so that humans outside the NTS will probably
not be exposed to high doses. But there is more and more
evidence that lower exposures, exposures to combinations of
chemicals, and interactions between hormones and chemicals, can
result in serious health effects, particularly for pregnant
women, fetuses and children. There may even be synergistic
effects between radiation and chemical exposures. And, as with
radiation exposure, problems stemming from chemical exposures
may not surface for years and by then are difficult to trace
conclusively to a particular source.
The products of the explosion do not have to reach the
stratosphere to travel. For example, soils and mine tailings in
Nevada may be the source of alarming levels of mercury in the
Great Salt Lake and Idaho's Salmon Falls Creek Reservoir.
Certain airborne pollutants released at or near ground level
even cross the oceans. Some dust reaching Florida from North
Africa contains 2 parts per million of mercury - far greater
than amounts normally found in the air, probably coming from
Algerian open-pit mines. Likewise, the U.S. receives pollutants
traveling across the Pacific Ocean from coal-fired plants in
China. Many industrial chemicals also move by atmospheric
transport toward the poles, which is why polar bears have some
of the highest levels of PCBs in their tissues of any animals on
the planet.
These facts show that we are all Downwinders eventually, whether
the toxins falling on us are radioactive or chemical. Yet the
Nevada Environmental Protection Bureau of Air Pollution Control
appears to be the only governmental entity pushing back against
the NTS even a little. Given that the defense-related federal
agencies stonewall federal environmental monitoring,
environmental and health agencies in downwind states ought to
join with Nevada to protect their citizens. The motto for the
21st century should be, not NIMBY- "Not In My Back Yard" - but
rather NOMP: "Not On My Planet."
Valerie Brown is a freelance science writer based in Oregon. She
is an Idaho native and a thyroid cancer survivor.
August 4, 2006
Copyright ©2006 The Spectrum.
*****************************************************************
34 Prague Daily Monitor: Several thousand litres of radioactive water leak at Temelin
"http://www.praguemonitor.com
Ceske Budejovice, Aug 3 (CTK) - Several thousand litres of
slightly radioactive water leaked in the second unit of nuclear
power plant Temelin, southern Bohemia, on Wednesday afternoon,
Temelin spokesman Milan Nebesar told CTK today.
Radioactive substances have not leaked to the surrounding
countryside or outside the zone monitored by the plant. Neither
has the leak threatened the health of Temelin staff, Nebesar
said.
The water leaked in two rooms which are hermetically sealed with
no staff inside.
"The cause was open manually operated fittings used for an
occasional supply of siphons of one the auxiliary systems of one
of the collecting tanks which are not part of the reactor's
pressure unit," Nebesar said, stressing the accident happened
outside the primary circuit.
The staff was probably checking the supply system and did not
fully tighten the fittings, he added.
The State Authority for Nuclear Safety (SUJB) said in a
preliminary statement that the incident had little significance
but that it would look into it.
"The frequency of the problems is quite high but it is nothing
to speak about from the safety standpoint," said SUJB chairwoman
Dana Drabova.
The plant's second unit operates at the planned output. The
first unit is due to be shut down because of fuel replacement
carried out every year.
kou/er
This story copyright 2006 CTK Czech News Agency.
*****************************************************************
35 DHHS: Petition from Harshaw Chemical(Uranium Refinery)
FR Doc 06-6683
[Federal Register: August 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 150)]
[Notices] [Page 44298] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04au06-73]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Decision To Evaluate and Petition To Designate a Class of
Employees at Harshaw Chemical Company (Also Known as Uranium
Refinery and/or Harshaw Filtrol Partners), Cleveland, OH, To Be
Included in the Special Exposure Cohort AGENCY: Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS). ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gives
notice as required by 42 CFR 83.12(e) of a decision to evaluate a
petition to designate a class of employees at Harshaw Chemical
Company (also known as Uranium Refinery and/or Harshaw Filtrol
Partners), to be included in the Special Exposure Cohort under
the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program
Act of 2000. The initial proposed definition for the class being
evaluated, subject to revision as warranted by the evaluation, is
as follows:
Facility: Harshaw Chemical Company.
Location: Cleveland, Ohio.
Job Titles and/or Job Duties: All workers at Harshaw Chemical
Company plant and the laboratories of the separate facility
located at 1945 East 97th Street.
Period of Employment: January 1, 1942 through November 30,
1949.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office
of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46,
Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a
toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by
e-mail to OCAS@CDC.GOV.
Dated: August 1, 2006.
John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc.
06-6683 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-M
*****************************************************************
36 DHHS: Designation of Employees
FR Doc 06-6684
[Federal Register: August 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 150)]
[Notices] [Page 44298] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04au06-74]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Final Effect of Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition
to the Special Exposure Cohort AGENCY: Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gives
notice concerning the final effect of the HHS decision to
designate a class of employees at the Nevada Test Site (NTS),
Mercury, Nevada, as an addition to the Special Exposure Cohort
(SEC) under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness
Compensation Program Act of 2000. On June 26, 2006, as provided
for under 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b), the Secretary of HHS designated the
following class of employees as an addition to the SEC:
Department of Energy (DOE) employees or DOE contractor or
subcontractor employees who worked at the Nevada Test Site from
January 27, 1951 through December 31, 1962 for a number of work
days aggregating at least 250 work days, either solely under this
employment or in combination with work days within the parameters
(excluding aggregate work day requirements) established for other
classes of employees included in the SEC, and who were monitored
or should have been monitored.
This designation became effective on July 26, 2006, as provided
for under 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C). Hence, beginning on July 26,
2006, members of this class of employees, defined as reported in
this notice, became members of the Special Exposure Cohort.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office
of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46,
Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a
toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by
e-mail to . John Howard, Director, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. [FR Doc. 06-6684 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE
4163-19-M
*****************************************************************
37 UPI: Study: French nuke tests linked to cancers
United Press International - NewsTrack -
8/4/2006 2:41:00 PM -0400
PARIS, Aug. 4 (UPI) -- A French study has found an increase in
thyroid cancer among people living within 1,000 miles of the
country's most recent nuclear tests in the Pacific.
Florent de Vathaire, a cancer expert at Inserm, a medical
research institute, said that the number of cancers attributable
to the tests is small but significant, The Independent reported.
Before 1966, France conducted most of its nuclear tests in North
Africa. Between 1966 and 1996, it conducted 193 tests at Mururoa
and Fangataufa atolls. In 1995, President Jacques Chirac made
the controversial decision to resume nuclear testing in the
Pacific, justifying it on the grounds that there was no risk to
human health.
The Inserm study was the first to show a definitive link between
the French tests and disease, the newspaper said. High levels of
radiation were detected on some Pacific islands immediately
after the tests.
Vathaire urged the government to fund more studies, including
screening of military personnel involved in the tests.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
38 Sydney Morning Herald: Australia urged to take back nuke waste -
August 5, 2006 - 6:14AM
Environmental scientist Tim Flannery says Australia should be
prepared to take the world's nuclear waste if it is to be one of
the world's largest uranium suppliers it.
By doing so, Australia would reduce the risk of a "nuclear
holocaust", Dr Flannery said.
The danger of plutonium from the nuclear waste cycle finding its
way into weapons of mass destruction was a greater concern than
the increased security risk that a nuclear waste dump posed, he
believed.
"To me, the nuclear waste issue is trivial relative to the
(nuclear) proliferation issue," The Weekend Australian newspaper
quoted him as saying.
"I just think the danger of a nuclear holocaust is pretty
substantial."
Despite his concerns, Dr Flannery also argued that the federal
government should move to replace coal-fired power stations with
nuclear power.
"When we burn coal in Australia, we spread the pollution
globally, whereas the liability for storing any nuclear waste
would be solely with us."
The climate change author and former South Australian Museum
director said one of the safest sites in the world for a nuclear
waste dump was Officer Basin in the South Australian-West
Australian desert, research by the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) showed.
He has said continued use of fossil fuels would result in huge
rises in sea level, droughts, hurricanes and political
instability.
© 2006 AAP
+
Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald. ![]()
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- An Energy Department official said Thursday there
is "zero" chance to meet new deadlines to open a nuclear waste
repository at Yucca Mountain unless Congress broadens DOE powers
to keep the project moving forward.
Project director Ward Sproat urged senators to pass a "fix Yucca"
bill to clear away potential problems that could delay DOE's
latest repository deadline of 2017.
"The probability of making that schedule without the legislation
is zero," Sproat said.
But repository critics said at a hearing of the Senate Energy
and Natural Resources Committee that DOE was trying to cut
corners. The bill would allow DOE to run roughshod over Nevada
and other states on transportation, water claims and handling of
toxic waste, they said.
"You have before you a bill that attempts like a cowcatcher on a
locomotive to anticipate and sweep aside every potential health
and safety obstacle," said Bob Loux, director of the Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects.
"This bill overreaches and should be withdrawn," said Geoffrey
Fettus, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Martin Virgilio, a deputy executive director at the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, also questioned the bill, saying it could
cut short the NRC's time to carry out comprehensive safety
reviews of the plan.
The committee chairman, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said he was
planning a scaled back version of the DOE bill for action this
fall. He would not say what parts of the sweeping bill he would
include and which parts he might scrap.
Domenici said he was taking the new DOE schedule with a grain of
salt. The repository was supposed to have been operating by
1998, and a 2010 target opening also was abandoned.
"Experience has shown that the schedule for Yucca is a slippery
thing," Domenici said, adding that the 2017 deadline contains no
margins for future delays or lawsuits by the state of Nevada.
Nor does it lay out how long it will take DOE to ship commercial
fuel to the site once it has opened.
The DOE bill contains a dozen or so changes to federal law that
Yucca managers say they need to lay the groundwork for
repository licensing and construction.
Among other things, it would allow DOE to overcome Nevada
resistance to obtain water rights, assert powers on waste
transportation, reclassify a budget account so larger sums might
be spent for construction, and repeal a 70,000 metric ton limit
on how much waste can be stored in the mountain.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the DOE bill signals desperation.
"If Yucca were scientifically sound -- if it was genuinely safe
-- we would not have this bill and we would not be here today,"
he said.
In testimony, Reid and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. focused on a DOE
bid to assert control over a portion of the Nellis Test and
Training Range adjacent to the Yucca site.
The Energy Department is asking Congress in its bill to sign off
on a 147,000-acre public land withdrawal that would give DOE
prominence on 24,000 acres now run by the Air Force. It also
calls for a no-fly zone around the repository.
"This is a very dangerous precedent to start and very dangerous
for the national security of the United States," Ensign said.
Sproat said during a break that he was told the Air Force signed
off on the land withdrawal when the bill was being formulated
within the Bush administration. The Air Force would be allowed
continued use of the land under terms to be set by DOE and the
Pentagon, according to the DOE bill.
"The amount of land that is being withdrawn is less than 1
percent of the total area of Nellis Air Force Range and the
no-fly zone is four miles in radius," Sproat told senators. "The
Air Force did not see a problem."
Loux said he found it hard to believe the Air Force would agree
to overflight and land use restrictions given it customarily has
been protective of its training areas.
"People at Nellis have told us they would never agree to a
no-fly zone," Loux said.
Air Force officials at Nellis Air Force Base and at the Pentagon
did not respond to queries by deadline.
DOE officials said the Pentagon has an interest in completing
the Yucca repository because thousands of tons of waste from
nuclear weapons production would be buried there.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
43 Rutland Herald: Nuclear waste bill vexes politicians
Rutland Vermont News & Information
August 4, 2006
By Louis PorterVermont Press Bureau
MONTPELIER — A bill making its way through the Congress would,
regional officials fear, move the problems of dealing with the
storage of spent nuclear fuel from the federal government onto
the states.
Gov. James Douglas and other members of the Coalition of
Northeastern Governors have written to key lawmakers voicing
their objection to the plan, which has passed the U.S. Senate
Appropriations Committee and is expected to come before the full
Senate in September at the earliest.
"Congress appears to be on the verge of telling states it's
their own problem," Douglas said Thursday. "That is a breach of
the deal we have had for some time."
Ratepayers and citizens in Vermont and elsewhere have been
paying into the system on the assumption that the long-term
storage of nuclear waste would be overseen by the federal
government at a central location at Yucca Mountain, Nev., the
governors said.
The proposed change, if approved, could result in spent fuel
being stored at local or regional storage facilities in as many
as 31 states, according to the Northeast governors.
Those 31 states, including Vermont, already have 50,000 tons of
nuclear waste awaiting permanent storage. The site at Yucca
Mountain, about 90 miles north of Las Vegas, was supposed to be
completed several years ago. The new date for the facility to
open is expected to be 2017 at the earliest.
The bill which includes the provision also contains funding for
a variety of water and energy projects, and it passed the Senate
Appropriations Committee unanimously.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt, a member of that committee, opposes
the provision dealing with nuclear waste storage, but the annual
budget bill contains many other essential projects including
some which benefit Vermont, said David Carle, a spokesman for
Leahy.
"Senator Leahy believes the best solution is to remove nuclear
waste from Vermont and other locations. The national repository
in Nevada is a better solution than opening the door to many new
temporary storage sites," Carle said.
However, the best chance to remove the provision from the bill
will be later in the process, he added.
The bill already has passed the U.S. House, but the section
dealing with nuclear waste storage was not included then. That
means that a conference committee between the two sides likely
will be convened to work out the differences if it passes the
Senate.
U.S. Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., an opponent of nuclear power,
voted for the water and energy budget bill in the House, before
the nuclear waste section was added. That provision likely will
meet opposition in the House, including from Sanders, according
to his office.
That section of the bill "undermines the federal commitment by
diverting these much-needed funds away from the intended purpose
of creating a safe and adequately designed permanent nuclear
waste repository and directs them toward a hastily created
network of federal consolidated storage facilities," the
governors warned in their letter.
Douglas reiterated that point at his weekly news conference
Thursday. "That is not the deal we had going into this," he
said. "That's not right."
Two Vermonters who are each hoping to join the U.S. House after
this fall's election, Democrat Peter Welch and Republican Martha
Rainville, both object to the idea as well.
Welch "is opposed to this initiative and feels that the federal
government is once again abdicating its responsibility and
failing to keep its commitments," said his campaign manager,
Caroline Dwyer.
Welch was Vermont's Senate president pro tem when the
Legislature worked out an agreement with Entergy Nuclear, the
company that owns Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, to store nuclear
waste in "dry cask" storage canisters in addition to the wet
"fuel pool" at the Vermont site until it can be put in long-term
federal storage at Yucca Mountain or elsewhere.
Rainville said in a statement released Thursday that the federal
government should live up to its commitment to deal with the
long-term storage of waste from nuclear plants.
"The changes proposed in the Senate bill may jeopardize our
citizens' health, safety and the environment, because local and
state authorities do not have the resources the federal
government can bring to bear," she said.
Rainville said recently that nuclear power should remain part of
the country's energy plan, and the possibility of building new
nuclear plants should be considered, according to news reports.
Contact Louis Porter at louis.porter@rutlandherald.com.
© 2006 Rutland Herald
*****************************************************************
44 Tennessean: Concerns raised over increasing amount of spent nuclear fuel -
Nashville, Tennessee - Friday, 08/04/06 - Tennessean.com
Friday, 08/04/06
TVA officials believe storage method is safe
Associated Press
CHATTANOOGA — Environmentalists are worried about increased spent
nuclear fuel stored at Tennessee Valley Authority power plants,
calling the waste "a recipe for disaster." TVA officials,
however, say the storage method is safe.
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Athens, Ala., with more than 1,400
metric tons of high-level radioactive waste stored in an
elevated pool inside the plant, is among the nation's leaders in
onsite spent nuclear fuel.
"This waste is being piled up on the river banks, and the river
is the drinking water source for thousands of people," said
Stephen Smith, director of the Southern Alliance for Clean
Energy. "Couple that with the known terrorists' threats, and
it's very discomforting."
The material is placed in an elevated pool until it cools enough
for the government to transport it to a permanent disposal
facility, but it's unclear when that will happen. The new
storage site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada was delayed again last
week until at least 2017.
An additional 37 metric tons of waste are being stored outside
the plant along the Tennessee River.
TVA officials are not pleased with the delay at Yucca Mountain,
but they say the stored waste is not a public threat.
"The storage in dry casks is a proven, safe technology," TVA
spokesman John Moulton said. "(The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission) has licensed the storage facilities, so there are
regulatory checks there."
Waste also is being stored at other plants. Sequoyah Nuclear
Plant in Soddy-Daisy has a full storage pool and outside
storage. Watts Bar Nuclear Plant in Spring City will need
dry-cask storage in about 12 years.
The three plants combined store more than 2,500 metric tons of
waste and radioactive fuel assemblies because there is nowhere
else to keep it.
"We sued (the U.S. Department of Energy), as did many other
utilities, because they didn't start picking up the spent fuel,"
Moulton said.
TVA's lawsuit was filed in 2001, and a federal court awarded TVA
$34.9 million to help pay for onsite storage through 2005. TVA
has paid about $758 million into the Nuclear Waste Fund for the
building of a permanent storage site.
Nationwide, there is about 55,000 metric tons of nuclear waste
being stored, and it increases by about 2,000 metric tons a
year, Nuclear Regulatory Agency officials said.
Copyright © 2006, tennessean.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
45 Easy bourse: US DOE Offers $20 Million For Nuclear Waste Recycling Sites
Thursday August 3rd, 2006 / 23h22
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Department of Energy announced
Thursday that it's making $20 million available for companies or
public entities interested in hosting nuclear waste recycling
facilities as part of the Bush administration's Global Nuclear
Energy Partnership.
Entities could receive up to $5 million per site, DOE said,
adding that preference for awards will be given to sites where
applicants have community and state support for the nuclear
facilities.
Additionally, the department also said it is seeking input from
the nuclear industry on the feasibility of accelerating
development of advanced spent fuel recycling technologies and
commercial scale demonstration facilities.
DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon said
the two initiatives "are important steps forward" for GNEP.
The president announced the GNEP initiative earlier this year as
a way to expand use of nuclear energy to meet growing demands
for electricity.
-By Maya Jackson Randall, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-9263;
Maya.Jackson-Randall@dowjones.com
Thursday August 3rd, 2006 / 23h22
sources : Dowjones Business News
Copyright © 2006 Easybourse - All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
46 AlterNet: EnviroHealth: Military Waste In Our Drinking Water
By Sunaura Taylor and Astra Taylor,
Posted August 4, 2006.
The U.S. military is poisoning the very citizens it is
In 1982 our family was living on the southside of Tucson, Ariz.,
in a primarily working class and Latino neighborhood not far from
the airport. That year Sunaura was born with a congenital birth
defect known as arthrogryposis, a condition that severely impedes
muscle growth and requires her to use an electric wheelchair. On
nearby blocks, women were giving birth to babies with physical
disabilities and neighbors were dying of cancer at worrisome
rates. Over time, we learned that our groundwater was
contaminated.
Most of us are vaguely aware that war devastates the environment
abroad. The Vietnamese Red Cross counts 150,000 children whose
birth defects were caused by their parents' exposure to Agent
Orange. Cancer rates in Iraq are soaring as a result of depleted
uranium left from the Gulf War. But what about closer to home?
Today the U.S. military generates over one-third of our nation's
toxic waste, which it disposes of very poorly. The military is
one of the most widespread violators of environmental laws.
People made ill by this toxic waste are, in effect, victims of
war. But they are rarely acknowledged as such.
On Sept. 11, 2001, we were living together in New York City. In
the months following the attack on the World Trade Center, the
media and government routinely informed a fearful citizenry of
the importance of clean drinking water. Terrorists, they warned,
might contaminate public sources with arsenic. We were instructed
to purchase Evian along with our duct tape.
In 2003, when the Defense Department sought (and later received)
exemptions from America's main environmental laws, the irony
dawned on us. The military was given license to pollute air and
water, dispose of used munitions, and endanger wildlife with
impunity. The Defense Department is willing to poison the very
citizens it is supposed to protect in the cause of national
security.
Our family knows of something much more dangerous than arsenic in
the public aquifers: trichloroethylene, or TCE, a known
carcinogen in laboratory animals and the most widespread
industrial contaminant in American drinking water.
Disturbingly common
Last week a studywas released by the National Academy of
Sciences, raising already substantial concerns about the cancer
risks and other health hazards associated with exposure to TCE, a
solvent used in adhesives, paint and spot removers that is also
"widely used to remove grease from metal parts in airplanes and
to clean fuel lines at missile sites." The report confirms a 2001
EPA document linking TCE to kidney cancer, reproductive and
developmental damage, impaired neurological function, autoimmune
disease and other ailments in human beings.
The report has been garnering some publicity, but not as much as
it deserves. TCE contamination is disturbingly common, especially
in the air, soil and water around military bases. Nationwide
millions of Americans are using what Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey,
D-NY, has called "TCE-laden drinking water." The Associated Press
reportsthat the chemical has been found at about 60 percent of
the nation's worst contaminated sites in the Superfund cleanup
program.
"The committee found that the evidence on carcinogenic risk and
other health hazards from exposure to trichloroethylene has
strengthened since 2001," the study says. "Hundreds of waste
sites are contaminated with trichloroethylene, and it is
well-documented that individuals in many communities are exposed
to the chemical, with associated health risks."
The report urges the EPA to amend its assessment of the threat
TCE poses, an action that could lead to stricter regulations.
Currently the EPA limits TCE to no more than five parts per
billion parts of drinking water. Stricter regulation could force
the government to require more thorough cleanups at military and
other sites and lower the number to one part per billion.
The EPA found it impossible to take such action back in 2001,
because, according to the Associated Press, the agency was
"blocked from elevating its assessment of the chemical's risks in
people by the Defense Department, Energy Department and NASA, all
of which have sites polluted with it." The Bush administration
charged the EPA with inflating TCE's risks and asked the National
Academy to investigate. Contrary to the administration's hopes,
however, the committee's report has reinforced previous findings,
which determined TCE to be anywhere from two to 40 times more
carcinogenic than previously believed.
Thousands contaminated
We didn't know it when we lived there, but our Tucson
neighborhood's public water supply was one of thousands
nationwide contaminated with TCE (along with a medley of other
toxic chemicals including, ironically, arsenic). It wasn't
terrorists who laced our cups and bathtubs with these poisons --
it was private contractors employed by the Air Force.
Beginning during the Korean War, military contractors began using
industrial solvents, including TCE, to degrease airplane parts.
Hughes Missiles Systems Co. (which was purchased by the Raytheon
Corp. in 1997) worked at the Tucson International Airport,
spilling chemicals off the runway and letting them sink into the
soil of a city entirely dependent on its underground water
supply. What didn't seep into the earth was dumped into unlined
pits scraped into the desert floor. Over the course of many years
Hughes used barrels and barrels of TCE at the airport hangars and
at weapons system manufacturing facilities on government-owned
and contractor-operated land not far from where we lived. As late
as 1985, 2,220 pounds of TCE was still being dumped in Tucson
landfills every month.
Like so many other toxic hotspots, Tucson's southside is
primarily a working-class community called home by many people of
color. It is situated near the San Xavier Indian reservation,
which also had residential areas affected by runoff.
Generally, fines associated with hazardous waste laws are up to
six times higher in white communities than their minority
counterparts. What has happened in Tucson since the early '80s
reflects this unevenness. There has been only one legal case
against the military and its cohorts, a lengthy personal-injury
lawsuit filed in behalf of 1,600 people against the aircraft
manufacturer, the city of Tucson and the Tucson Airport Authority
(citizens are not allowed to sue the federal government over such
matters). The case excluded thousands of potential plaintiffs and
did not include funds from which future claimants could collect
for illnesses like cancers, which typically do not appear until
10 or 20 years after chemical exposure. As a result, many
southside residents have yet to be compensated and probably never
will be. To this day, some area wells remain polluted, and most
estimate cleanup will not be completed for another 20 to 50
years. Meanwhile, residents have the small consolation their
water supply is being monitored.
The National Academy of Sciences study is a step in the right
direction, but one that will certainly be met with resistance. In
Tucson, because the lawsuit was settled out of court, none of the
defendants had to admit that TCE is carcinogenic. Instead of
acknowledging the link between TCE and local health problems,
officials blamed the smoking and eating habits of local residents
and said their cancer was the result of "eating too much chili."
It was suggested to our parents, who are white, that Sunaura's
birth defect may have been the consequence of high peanut butter
consumption.
But people who have lived on the southside of Tucson don't need
experts to verify that TCE is deadly. Some estimate that up to
20,000 individuals have died, become ill, or been born with birth
defects. Providing further proof, the Tucson International
Airport area is one of the EPA's top Superfund sites. Arizona
state guidelines also assert that TCE is toxic; they say one
gallon of TCE is enough to render undrinkable the amount of water
used by 3,800 people over an entire year. Over 4,000 gallons
drained into Tucson aquifers. As a result of this week's report,
Arizona's environmental quality chief says the state is
independently and immediately going to adopt stricter TCE soil
standards.
It's an ugly truth that manufacturing weaponry to kill abroad
also kills at home. The process involves toxic chemicals, metals
and radioactive materials. As a consequence, the U.S. military
produces more hazardous waste annually than the five largest
international chemical companies combined. The Pentagon is
responsible for over 1,400 propertiescontaminated with TCE.
Citizens, who pay for the military budget with their tax dollars,
are also paying with their health and sometimes their lives.
Sunaura Taylor, a figurative painter, has written on disability
for various publications. View her paintings online at
www.sunnytaylor.org. Astra Taylor is a writer and documentary
filmmaker. Her first book, "Shadow of the Sixties," is
forthcoming from the New Press in 2007.
This is happening all over the US
And it's not just TCE causing problems. Just ask the residents of
Cape Cod. For over 20 years, they have been trying to get the
contamination caused by Otis Air Force Base cleaned up. ALL of
Cape Cod's water comes from the sole-source aquifer that lies
under Cape Cod and the plume from Otis continues to grow. Is the
huge increase in women suffering Hashimoto's Thyroiditis caused
by perchlorate (known to inhibit thyroid production) that is
leaching from the air force base? The Air Force refuses to
release the study. Was my daughter's bladder defect causes by
drinking the contaminated water (which was known at the time I
was pregnant, but the information wasn't released until a year
after her birth)? Do my daughter and I suffer from Hashimoto's
because of the contamination? How much of the epidemic of thyroid
disease in the US caused by our own military?
US military bases cause health problems all over the world
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Haz Mom on Aug 4, 2006 10:32 AM
Unfortunately there is no shortage of communities with alarming
health problems living near military bases with known
contamination problems. Here are some more of them:
Fallon childhood leukemia clusterReno Gazette Journal portal site
to dozens of articles about the childhood leukemia cluster near
Fallon, NV--home of the Navy's "Top Gun" flight training
facility, and most severe leukemia cluster known in history
Sierra Vista childhood leukemia cluster, near Fort Huachuca army
base in AZ.
Guam childhood leukemia clusterPacific Daily News profile of a
father fighting to clean up PCBs and other military toxics.
Kelly Air Force Base in San AntonioLA Times: "Cancer Stalks a
Toxic Triangle."
Military toxics in Alaska
Marine training base Camp Lejeune in NC has a long history of
toxics in the water and contaminated base housing, with terrible
health results.
Toxic Kitsap and Polluted PugetPuget Sound Naval Shipyard has a
leukemia cluster in their workers.
Pratt & Whitney Jet Engine Factoryin Connecticut, where 87
workers have been diagnosed with brain cancer since the 1960s,
and 36 have died.
Norwich England Esophageal Cancer Cluster, the British military
tested chemical weapons spreading by dropping cadmium, a known
carcinogen, on the townspeople of Norwich.
BE SAFEoverview of military toxics.
It is easy for this subject to fall into an argument between the
right and the left, but we should rise above these party lines.
One of the most exposed populations are the enlisted personnel
themselves. These exposures on military bases lead to an increase
in infertility, birth defects, and children suffering chronic
illnesses like cancer, asthma, ADD, autism, etc. Our troops are
willing to risk their lives to defend our country, but they never
agreed to sacrifice their children's lives as well.
We need to follow Europe's lead in shifting the burden of proof
for toxicity to the polluters, not their victims. We need to take
a precautionary approach, and find safe substitutes for the toxic
chemicals currently in widespread use by the military and others.
For more information, visit Families Against Cancer & Toxics
© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
47 PRN: LES: LES Announces Jim Ferland's Resignation
Louisiana Energy Services National Enrichment Facility ::
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M., Aug. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Louisiana Energy
Services (LES) today announced the resignation of President and
CEO Jim Ferland, who will be taking a position with a leading
nuclear energy company located in the Eastern United States.
Ferland will leave the company at the end of September 2006.
"All of us at Urenco and LES are indeed sorry to lose Jim; he
has done a magnificent job in managing LES to its historic
receipt of a license to construct and operate the National
Enrichment Facility (NEF) outside Eunice, New Mexico," said
Helmut Engelbrecht, Urenco Group CEO who was in New Mexico this
week to begin transition planning.
While a replacement has not been selected, Engelbrecht indicated
he is working diligently to find a suitable candidate to fill
the vacancy.
"Urenco is committed to the continued operation of LES as an
open, honest company that is a good corporate citizen, working
with our community every day," Engelbrecht said. "Whoever
replaces him in this position will bring that commitment with
him or her."
Ferland joined LES in 2003 and led the company through its
successful licensing process. LES has became the first
large-scale commercial nuclear facility to be licensed by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 30 years and the first ever to
receive a combined construction and operating license.
"This has been an amazing time," said Jim Ferland, LES
President. "I have had the opportunity to work with a team of
people that did an amazing job -- ensuring we would receive this
historic license from the NRC. The support and friendships I
have developed in Lea County and in New Mexico will stay with me
for years to come."
With preparations underway for the facilities groundbreaking at
the end of August, the focus of the company has shifted from
licensing to construction and operations.
The $1.5 billion NEF project will provide close to 300 fulltime
and contract jobs and more than 1000 multi-year construction
jobs in Southeast New Mexico. It will use a proven technology
that has operated safely in Europe for 30 years.
When construction is complete, the NEF will operate the nation's
most advanced uranium enrichment facility and provide a secure
domestic enrichment supply source to the U.S. nuclear energy
companies that provide 20% of the electricity used in the United
States.
LES is a U.S. limited partnership formed to license, construct,
and operate the NEF. As of March 3, 2006 Urenco is the general
partner.
Copyright © 1996-2003 PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
Reserved.
A United Business Media company.
*****************************************************************
48 Daily Local News: Radioactive waste, tardy guardians not a good mix
08/04/2006
Highly radioactive spent fuel from a nuclear power plant and a
sleeping security guard are the kinds of things you’d expect to
see on an episode of "The Simpsons."
Nuclear power and "The Simpsons" are like peanut butter and
jelly.
Mr. Burns, owner of the fictional Springfield Nuclear Power
Plant, has become well-known for such actions as offering free
beer to the plant employees in place of a dental plan.
Or, how about this from our dear Mr. Burns: "Oh, ‘meltdown.’
It’s one of those annoying ‘buzzwords.’ We prefer to call it an
unrequested fission surplus."
But the radioactive spent fuel and sleeping security guards
aren’t on any recent Simpson episode.
This is reality. It’s not comedy and it’s not far away -- right
up the road in Limerick Township.
Limerick’s Board of Supervisors recently removed the final
hurdle for Exelon’s plan to store highly radioactive spent
nuclear fuel rods in outdoor steel and concrete casks at the
Limerick Generating Station.
There seemed to be little that Limerick officials could do to
stop the plan as the nuclear aspects of the project fall under
the watchful eye of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Limerick supervisors’ Chairman David Kane said the only
jurisdiction the supervisors had was related to the land
development aspects of the project.
"We have no control over the use and safety issues at the
plant," said Kane. "We’re voting to approve a concrete pad and
stormwater controls."
That’s no consolation for anyone who lives in the shadows of
Limerick’smammoth cooling towers.
One resident said nothing NRC officials say could "guarantee the
safety of my family," adding she is "worried Limerick will
become a dump site for this waste."
There has apparently been an agreement that Limerick would not
accept outside fuel.
But that’s not the only concern for residents.
Some wondered whether the area -- which has seen incredible
growth in the last decade -- could be reasonably evacuated in
the event of an emergency.
Another pointed out that the radioactivity would surely outlast
the storage methods eyed by Exelon.
But many of those concerned spoke about security -- and the
threat of terrorism -- which brings us back to the sleeping
security guard.
Security at the plant is provided by an outside contractor,
Wackenhut Nuclear Security.
Exelon recently announced that a security supervisor had been
"removed from duty."
The reason? The woman had been "inattentive" which the company
later admitted meant she was sleeping.
A plan for dangerous radioactive waste combined with sleeping
security is not acceptable.
Residents can’t be expected to be happy about the two.
We want Exelon to guarantee they have the security issue under
control BEFORE they start storing anything this lethal.
And we don’t care that the plan to make random checks on the
efficiency of security is "working." The fact that they’re
successful in finding sleeping security is no consolation.
When the terrorists roll up to the gates in Limerick, it won’t
make much difference.
Exelon -- get this problem fixed.
©Daily Local News 2006
Copyright © 1995 - 2006 Townnews.comAll Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
49 News & Star: We dont want nuclear waste
Published on 04/08/2006
[Sellafield: We’re fed up of being a dumping ground says Mrs
Richard ]
I DON’t think we want all this nuclear waste being buried in
West Cumbria (News &Star, August 1).
Don’t we have enough rubbish up here?
Haven’t we had enough underground disasters?
What are we leaving our children in the future?
If this waste is so safe, bury it under Buckingham Palace or even
in one of the royal homes. Why not bury it in Camilla’s back
garden? See how they like it.
They always bring the rubbish up here and bury it as far away
from royalty and the government as they can.
Let’s face it, who has faith in our government now?
Mrs Richard
Whitehaven
*****************************************************************
50 times and star: US firm leads N-waste storage race
workington lake district
Published on 04/08/2006
AN AMERICAN company is leading an international consortium
bidding to take over the management of a radioactive waste
repository in West Cumbria.
EnergySolutions, in Salt Lake City in Utah, is heading the group,
with three other firms, including British Nuclear Group, chasing
the ÂŁ100 million contract to run the site near Drigg.
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which has overall
responsibility for the decommissioning of nuclear installations
in the UK, is running a pre-selection process for tenders to
manage and operate the low-level waste repository. The contract
is expected to be awarded to the successful bidder towards the
middle of next year.
Philip Strawbridge, EnergySolutions’ international group
president, said: “We’ve lined up what we believe is a pretty
strong team so we rate our chances highly.
“EnergySolutions manages most of the low-level waste
repositories in the United States. Additionally, we have selected
three industry-leading partners.
“This will ensure that we are able to exceed the expectations
of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority over contract delivery
and customer relationships.
“We believe we have combined the best of British ingenuity,
relationships and local knowledge with US experience, innovation
and project management.
“We will focus on minimising the amount of waste that comes to
Drigg.”
Mr Strawbridge, who visited the Drigg repository this week to
talk with representatives from the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority, said he expected the authority to begin shortlisting
towards the end of the summer and have a contract in place around
six to nine months later.
He said he had no firm figure on the number of jobs to be created
but added: “We would anticipate that the jobs would grow.”
The contract will include designing and building additional
vaults at the site for the storage of low-level waste, together
with the development of additional infrastructure.
It is estimated that the contract for running the repository at
Drigg will be worth approximately ÂŁ100 million.
EnergySolutions said it was also planning to assist in the
development and implementation of a national low-level waste
strategy to accelerate nuclear clean-up in the UK.
The other consortium members are British Nuclear Group, which has
managed and operated the repository for more than 30 years,
Jacobs Babtie, a major UK engineering company and Fluor Limited,
the UK operating arm of Fluor Corporation, one of the world’s
largest project management companies.
Paul Hamer, managing director of British Nuclear Group’s
Project Services business, said: “This is a great team and
we’re proud to be part of it.
“It is exceptionally strong and blends British Nuclear
Group’s decades of operational experience on this particular
site and our outstanding waste management capability with the
most capable and prestigious partners in the industry to create a
team that will deliver the best value to the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority and the UK taxpayer.”
A Nuclear Decommissioning Authority spokesman would not say how
many applications it had received but said once qualifying
bidders had been shortlisted, they would be invited to tender for
the contract towards the end of October.
*****************************************************************
51 nature.com: Nuclear waste gets star attention - Claims of
'neutralizing' radioactivity grab headlines and have even piqued
the interest of Madonna. Phil Ball explains, to her and us,
whether any of it will solve our problems with nuclear waste.
4 August 2006
muse@nature.com: Nuclear waste gets star attention Claims of
'neutralizing' radioactivity grab headlines and have even piqued
the interest of Madonna. Phil Ball explains, to her and us,
whether any of it will solve our problems with nuclear waste.
Philip Ball
A crunch looms in dealing with nuclear waste, and so there's no
better time for airing unorthodox solutions. The latest comes
from a team of physicists in Germany, who say that radioactive
decay might be speeded up by sticking the atoms in metals cooled
to within a few degrees of absolute zero.
The claim is disputed by other scientists, although the findings
of the German group seem genuinely puzzling. The key question,
however, is how we are to deal with such reports. Some
techniques for altering the half-lives of radioactive elements
have a basis in sound science but others lurk at the wilder
fringes. Can they be told apart?
I've had unusual cause to ponder these questions. A few years
ago, I found myself in the rather surreal situation of trying to
explain to Madonna why it is generally beyond the means of
science to tamper with rates of radioactive decay.
Dirty job: radioactive waste is tough to deal with.© Getty
She had heard (don't ask me how) about a team of Russian
scientists who claimed to have developed a way to treat water so
that it can 'neutralize' radioactive waste. They had data
allegedly showing that the process worked on a lake contaminated
by the Chernobyl accident. Since I had written a book about
water, I was summoned as a putative 'specialist' to discuss the
findings.
So there we were: me, Guy Ritchie, 'Mrs R', and a clutch of
excited scientists, talking for a couple of hours about a way to
eliminate the carcinogenic legacy of nuclear power (or not).
Water works
Madonna has made no secret of her interest in this work she
has been quoted on it in Rolling Stone magazine. I was told soon
after our meeting that a California-based company was interested
in working with the Russians and Madonna to promote the
waste-treatment scheme. But they never got back in touch with
me, so I've no idea what came of the plan.
One can hardly blame a non-scientist for being excited by claims
of "a way to neutralize radiation". As I tried to explain on
that strange afternoon, radioactive decay can't be 'neutralized'
in the same way that, say, one might neutralize a nasty acid.
Yet that's not to say it is totally beyond our influence.
The Russian scientists suggested that their process might have
something to do with the 'quantum Zeno effect', a phenomenon in
which quantum probabilities are altered by repeated
measurement1,2. In principle it might be possible to exploit
this effect; but it is normally tiny, and it's far from obvious
how it might be translated into anything remotely useful, let
alone how it might be induced by 'electromagnetically processed'
water, as suggested by the Russians (who, to my knowledge, have
never published the work).
More credible, I think, was the report by a team of researchers
in Japan in 2004 that they had decreased the half-life of the
radioisotope beryllium-7 by almost 1%, or half a day3 (see
'Radioactivity gets fast-forward',). The researchers trapped
atoms inside electron-rich, soccer-ball-shaped cages of carbon,
making it slightly more likely that an electron would find its
way into the nucleus and bring about the transmutation of the
radioactive element.
But the team couldn't make the effect any larger; the prospect
of using it to speed up the decay of nuclear waste, they
admitted, was "somewhat remote".
Cold comfort
Claus Rolfs of the Ruhr University in Bochum, team leader of the
latest attempt to accelerate nuclear decay4,5, is more
optimistic about his own findings, saying that they suggest the
possibility of reducing the half-life of radium-226, a hazardous
component of spent nuclear fuel, from around 1,600 years to just
1 year. "This means that nuclear waste could probably be dealt
with entirely within the lifetimes of the people that produce
it," Rolfs says.
His approach is somewhat similar to that of the Japanese work,
placing the radioactive atoms in the electron-rich environment
of a metal. The metal's 'sea' of free electrons can enhance the
probability that a positively charged particle might be ejected
from the nucleus as happens in some types of radioactive decay
as well as raising the chance of decay by electron capture,
Rolfs says. Lower temperatures apparently bring the free
electron closer to the radioactive nuclei.
Rolfs's team and their European co-workers have reported a
decrease of about 1% in the half-life of sodium-22. And recently
they described similar effects for heavy metals, suggesting that
the technique could be viable for the elements typically found
in radioactive waste such as radium. But the estimate on how
fast these elements could be made to decay is so far only
theoretical.
Other nuclear scientists have said that the findings contradict
earlier experiments and, more damningly, current understanding
of solid-state physics.
Magic bullets
But they are at least based on a plausible and testable theory.
That's probably more than can be said for some of the 'nuclear
remediation technologies' circulating on the fringes of science.
One of the favourites involves Brown's gas, a putative form of
water 'discovered' by American engineer William Rhodes in the
1960s and championed subsequently by the Bulgarian-Australian
physicist Yull Brown. As well as 'neutralizing radioactive
waste', this 'oxy-hydrogen gas' (produced by what seems to be
basically electrolysis of water) is said to burn like a fuel,
weld metals, support breathing, help plants germinate and relax
muscles.
If it sounds too good to be true, that's because it surely is.
Like perpetual motion or the idea of water as fuel, a magic
bullet for nuclear remediation has become something of a
cultural myth. The fiction of cold fusion (advocated, for one,
by Yull Brown) was also mooted as a way to transmute nuclear
waste to harmless forms. There's a pattern to these fantasies,
and I can't help feeling that Madonna's magic water fitted it
rather closely.
Under the carpet
Yet the problem these claims confront is a very real one. Last
month, the UK's Committee on Radioactive Waste Management
criticized the failure of British governments to address the
issue of waste disposal for more than three decades, and
insisted that a site for deep burial must be found very soon. In
the United States, the favoured site of Yucca Mountain in Nevada
won't be accepting waste until 2017 at the earliest if at all.
These delays reflect a public discomfort about sweeping waste
under the carpet. Burial is not a pretty solution. But at the
moment, alternatives based on 'neutralizing' radioactivity look
as unreachable as ever.
So all of us, celebrities included, will probably just have to
learn to live with the stuff.
References
1. Kofman A. G.& Kurizki G. Nature, 405. 546 - 550 (2000). |
Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
2. Fischer M.C., et al. Phys. Rev. Lett., 87. 040402 (2001).
3. Ohtsuki T., et al. Phys. Rev. Lett., 93. 112501 (2004).
4. Limata B., et al. Eur. Phys. J. A, 28. 251 - 252 (2006).
5. Kettner K. U., et al. J. Phys. G. Nucl. Part. Phys., 32.
489 - 495 (2006).
[news at nature]
ISSN: 1744-7933
©2006 Nature Publishing Group | Privacy policy
*****************************************************************
52 AJC: Utilities: Nuclear waste sits at plants |
ajc.com
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution]
Southern Co. executive tells panel that customers have paid
billions and the feds should take custody.
By JEFF NESMITH The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 08/04/06
Washington The federal government has failed to dispose of
thousands of tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste from power
plants a job electrical customers in Georgia and elsewhere have
paid billions of dollars to get done, a Southern Co. official
told a Senate committee Thursday.
J. Barnie Beasley Jr., president of Southern Nuclear Operating
Co., said the federal government is legally obligated to move the
waste from power plants and store it on federal facilities. The
government "must" take responsibility for the waste, even though
it will be more than a decade before a planned waste repository
at Yucca Mountain in Nevada can open, he said.
Beasley said electricity users across America have paid
surcharges totaling $27 billion to dispose of the waste. Alabama
and Georgia electric power customers have paid $897 million, he
said.
"In order to fully recognize the benefits that nuclear power
offers, a solution must be found to the problem of disposal of
used nuclear fuel," Beasley told members of the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee.
Southern Nuclear Operating Co., a unit of Atlanta-based Southern
Co., operates the Hatch and Vogtle nuclear power plants in
Georgia and the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant in Alabama.
Since nuclear power plants do not release carbon dioxide into
the atmosphere, the industry has recently started promoting the
technology as a solution to the global warming problem.
More than 55,000 tons of highly radioactive used fuel assemblies
are being stored in steel-lined pools or dry casks at 103
operating nuclear plants and several decommissioned plants.
Critics say they are inviting targets for terrorists, and the
industry wants to get rid of them.
But testifying as a representative of the nuclear power
industry, Beasley complained that a 24-year-old federal effort
to deal with the nuclear fuel rods has been a "failure."
The Yucca Mountain project, in which up to 77,000 tons of used
fuel rods would be entombed inside a Nevada mountain for at
least 100,000 years, was to have opened in 1998.
The project has been dogged by ongoing scientific uncertainties
about safety, environmental concerns and even the discovery that
some of the safety data had been forged.
Nevada officials have fought furiously to keep Yucca Mountain,
located in the government's Nevada Test Site less than 100 miles
from Las Vegas, from becoming the final repository for used fuel
from other states.
An Energy Department official testified before the committee
that it will be at least 2017 before the government can get the
facility licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and into
operation.
And even that will require legislation that pre-empts state laws
and "streamlines" environmental regulations, said Edward Sproat,
director of the department's Office of Civilian Radioactive
Waste Management.
In addition, the department wants the limit of 77,000 tons
removed so that the repository might eventually take more than
115,000 tons of used fuel, and it wants Congress to order the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to assume that waste disposal is
not a problem when it considers licenses for future power
plants.
A bill to do those things was introduced by Sen. Pete Domenici
(R-N.M.), chairman of the energy committee, who also introduced
an amendment to the Energy Department's budget for next year,
directing it to select one or more interim sites for the fuel
while the Yucca Mountain license is being considered.
Beasley said that when Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act in 1982, the federal government took on an obligation to
dispose of the used fuel. The law imposes a surcharge on users
of electricity from nuclear power to finance disposal.
"The industry's top priority is for the federal government to
meet its statutory and contractual obligation to move used fuel
away from operating and decommissioned reactor sites," he said.
He called a bill to implement the latest changes sought by the
Energy Department "a good start" to deal with used fuel.
However, Natural Resources Defense Council lawyer Geoffrey
Fettus said the bill was another example of what he said was a
history of rigged regulations and "dramatically weakened" safety
and environmental standards involved in developing the Yucca
Mountain repository.
The bill, he said, "is just another symptom of what has been
going wrong with the program for nearly two decades."
"If we are ever to have a robust repository program that both
follows the original intent of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and
gains the trust of the American people, then the federal
government in both its executive and legislative incarnations
must cease efforts to weaken meaningful and protective health
and environmental standards," Fettus said.
© 2006 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution | | | | | |
*****************************************************************
53 Anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:10:07 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org
___________________________________________________
Friday, August 4, 2006
Anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Atomic Bombings
MARYLIA KELLEY, marylia@earthlink.net, http://www.trivalleycares.org
Kelley is executive director of Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities
Against a Radioactive Environment) located in Livermore, California.
She said today: "On August 6 and 9, 61 years after the U.S. dropped
atomic bombs on the Japanese cites of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, people
from around the globe will gather to stop nuclear weapons and war. In
the U.S., our protests will not only commemorate the past, they will
also reveal the oft-hidden face of continued nuclear weapons
development. Presently, Livermore lab in California and Los Alamos
lab in New Mexico are locked in a competition to design a new
submarine-launched nuclear warhead, the first new nuke in a Bush
administration initiative to re-design and rebuild every nuclear
weapon in the U.S. arsenal, under the so-called 'Reliable Replacement
Warhead' program. By taking action this August 6 and 9, we will honor
the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, whose skin was seared from
their bodies, and vow 'never again.' We will stand in solidarity with
all victims of war. We will rededicate our lives to peace and work to
prevent our government from developing new nuclear and other weapons
of mass destruction."
JACQUELINE CABASSO, wslf@earthlink.net, http://www.wslfweb.org,
http://www.august6.org
Cabasso is executive director of the Western States Legal
Foundation and a member of United for Peace and Justice's Steering
Committee. UFPJ is sponsoring nonviolent protests in 24 states on
August 5, 6 and 9 to observe the 61st anniversary of the atomic
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
For quotes from local organizers and speakers at protests across
the U.S., see .
IPA's communications director Sam Husseini was among the panelists at
an event at the Palestine Center on Tuesday which was covered by
C-Span. Video is available at:
.
For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
_________________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
public@lists.accuracy.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
public-unsubscribe@lists.accuracy.org
For all list information and functions, including changing
your subscription mode and options, visit the Web page:
http://lists.accuracy.org/lists/info/public
*****************************************************************
54 Guardian Unlimited: Most opposed to new nuclear weapons
[UP]
Press Association
Friday August 4, 2006 4:08 AM
Most people in Britain oppose the replacement of the Trident
nuclear weapons system, a new report has shown.
A survey of 1,000 adults for CND revealed that almost two out of
three are against a new generation of nuclear missiles.
CND said the result showed a 5% increase in public opposition to
Trident replacement from a similar poll almost a year ago.
The findings were published ahead of a 50,000-strong petition
being handed in to 10 Downing Street as part of a campaign
against Britain developing new nuclear weapons.
Kate Hudson, chairwoman of CND, said: "The poll and the No
Trident Replacement petition prove that ordinary people see
through the Government's case.
"People are increasingly seeing the reality of the situation
that replacing Trident will start a new nuclear arms race.
"If Britain insists that it needs nuclear weapons to ensure its
security, other countries will conclude the same, leading to
increased proliferation."
The poll and petition coincide with the 61st anniversary of the
atomic bombing of Hiroshima, which killed more than 140,000
people.
CND pointed out that Britain's Trident nuclear weapons system
currently consisted of approximately 200 nuclear bombs, each of
which were eight times more powerful than the bomb dropped on
Hiroshima in 1945.
The Government has promised MPs they will have the final say on
whether to order a new generation of nuclear missiles, which
would cost up to Ł25 billion.
© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2006, All Rights Reserved.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
55 Guardian Unlimited: Energy Chief Offers Nuclear Incentives
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday August 4, 2006 7:31 PM
By GREG BLUESTEIN
Associated Press Writer
ATLANTA (AP) - The nation's energy chief announced a plan Friday
to provide incentives to companies willing to build the first
new nuclear plants in 30 years, offering $2 billion in federal
insurance for construction of six plants.
``I think it's time for the nation that invented this technology
to reassert its leadership,'' Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman
said.
The United States has 103 nuclear power plants in 31 states, but
utilities have not proposed a new reactor since 1973. High costs
and debate over where to store radioactive waste bogged down
construction efforts, and a partial meltdown at the Three Mile
Island plant in 1979 in Pennsylvania put an end to plans for new
reactors.
But with energy prices on the rise, supporters of nuclear power
have promoted it as a way to generate cheaper electricity
without churning out greenhouse gases.
Bodman said 12 utilities are expected to file papers over the
next three years to build 18 reactors. The insurance plan would
provide up to $500 million in coverage for the first two plants
and up to $250 million for the next four plants.
``This program is crucial, we believe, to reinvigorating the
American nuclear power industry,'' Bodman told Georgia Power Co.
employees during a visit to Atlanta.
Georgia Power, which provides electricity to the Atlanta area,
might take up Bodman's offer. The company is considering
building a new reactor at its Plant Vogtle site near Waynesboro,
Ga.
``It's a very long process. So in order to keep that option
open, we are actually taking steps right now that will at least
allow us to be in the running,'' company spokeswoman Carol
Boatwright said.
Bodman's visit to Atlanta came at the end of a nationwide heat
wave that set record temperatures and strained electrical grids.
``The industry has performed very well. The problem is, we
haven't had sufficient investment,'' Bodman said. ``We are the
world's biggest economy. We should not have blackouts,
brownouts, rolling blackouts. That shouldn't be in our
vernacular.''
---
Department of Energy: http://www.doe.gov/
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
56 Amarillo Globe-News: Pantex railcars make last ride into history
Chron.com |
Aug. 3, 2006, 9:05PM
By JIM McBRIDE Amarillo Globe-News
AMARILLO — Once they served as Cold War sentinels, protecting
heavily armed crews who crisscrossed the country with nuclear
warheads in tow.
But several Pantex railcars recently made their final trek into
history as a Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad crew hauled
them to a new home at the Amarillo Railroad Museum.
The train, operated by the Energy Department's Office of Secure
Transportation, shipped nuclear warheads assembled at Pantex to
military weapons depots across the country. From 1951 to 1987,
the government shipped Navy nuclear weapons by rail to protect
the deadly cargo inside and because it was easier than trucking
them.
Originally, the cars were painted white to protect weapons
against the sun's heat. Later, the DOE painted the train in
different color schemes to thwart possible attacks and unwanted
protests. Eventually, the government began using armored
tractor-trailer rigs, or safe-secure transports, to ship weapons
and weapons components from weapons plants to U.S. military
bases.
The train, dubbed the "White Train" or the "Death Train" by
some, drew the notice of peace activists who monitored its
progress. In the mid-'80s, Oregon protesters once briefly
blocked the train with their bodies as it headed to a Trident
nuclear submarine base in Bangor, Wash.
Bob Roth, president of the Amarillo Railroad Museum, said Pantex
planned to rip up some railroad tracks and museum officials
inquired about several cars that stood idle on the southwest
corner of the 16,000-acre plant site. Museum officials then
hammered out a partnership with the Pantex Site Office, BWXT
Pantex and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, which moved
the train from Pantex and opened up a closed rail spur to the
museum's tracks.
"For the life of the train, for the most part, the cars all were
in a white color scheme. Our goal is to restore them back to the
original white color scheme like they used to be several years
ago," Roth said.
The museum, located at 13000 E. U.S. Highway 60, plans to
exhibit the cars next to another piece of historical Panhandle
railroad history, a specialized railcar that once hauled helium
across the country.
Roth said the museum's goal is to preserve railroad cars that
have a historic Panhandle link.
"Some of this equipment is, in a way, unique to the Texas
Panhandle," Roth said. "The DOE train fits right into that
scheme because it is unique to the Panhandle, having come out of
Pantex."
The museum's train, Roth said, has the last remaining
safe-secure railcar, a red, heavily armored car that transported
warheads.
Several other cars are called power-buffer cars because they
contained generators and provided a buffer between escort crews
and warheads.
"People could not ride in a car immediately adjacent to
explosives," Roth said.
Escort coaches carried the specially trained crews that kept a
close eye on the train as it wound along U.S. railways. A look
inside one of the escort coaches provided a glimpse into the
daily lives of couriers who accompanied weapons shipments.
One of the coaches had bunks to sleep eight, a full kitchen,
bulletproof windows and protected gun turrets to fire on
would-be attackers. A series of open cabinets still housed
several gas masks couriers could quickly don in case of a
poisonous gas attack.
The cars played a major role in Pantex's history, said Pantex
Site Office Manager Dan Glenn.
"The work done at Pantex was a significant part of the Cold
War," he said. "This donation will provide the public with the
opportunity to visit a piece of our nation's recent history."
Dan Swaim, BWXT Pantex president and general manager, said
students and area residents now will get a chance to see a
little-known aspect of the Cold War.
"The partnership between Pantex, BNSF and the Amarillo Railroad
Museum makes it possible for the community to learn about the
part Pantex played in the Cold War."
The museum plans to exhibit the cars as they looked when they
transported weapons to the military. Museum officials have not
set a schedule for opening the exhibit to the public.
*****************************************************************
57 SF New Mexican: LANL Chemist creates a safer form of ammo
Fri Aug 4, 2006 6:03 pm
By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican
A Los Alamos National Laboratory scientist has developed a less
toxic explosive for both civilian and military use.
The development has potential for broad uses in hunting and
military ammunition. And while the ammunition may be used to
lethal effect, government officials say the discovery could
better protect workers who manufacture ammunition or explosives
as well as reduce pollution of land and water near shooting
ranges and military bases.
My Hang Huynh, a chemist, developed a primary explosive made
with iron instead of lead.
Lead is toxic to humans. Chronic exposure to lead can result in
birth defects, miscarriage and learning disabilities in children.
"Unfortunately, devices using lead primary explosives are
manufactured by the tens of millions every year in the U.S.
alone," Huynh wrote in a report.
Primary explosives ignite main charges in a bullet or
conventional bomb, for example. They're used in small amounts to
generate an explosion, the lab explained in a report.
The new "green" primary explosive is made of iron, nitrogen,
carbon and oxygen. Huynh said in a recent interview that it's
cleaner, safer and less expensive to produce than traditional
lead azide and lead styphnate primary explosives, which have been
in use since 1907.
Huynh's work "is an unprecedented feat that could eliminate
heavy metal and perchlorate contamination at firing ranges and
other areas that employ large quantities of explosives and
munitions," wrote Michael D. Coburn, a retired lab scientist, in
a letter to R and D Magazine.
The magazine recognized Huynh's work with an R and D 100 Award,
one of a set of annual awards for the best applied research.
The U.S. Navy also commended the research. "The replacement of
lead azide is an extremely challenging task," wrote C.A.
Pfleegor, an engineering-division director in the Naval Surface
Warfare Center. "It has become a 'holy grail' of energetic
materials research."
The cost of making green primaries is not comparable to making
lead-based primaries, Huynh said, because safety and health
concerns are removed with the new chemical compound. They're not
toxic, so there's no need to invest in waste disposal,
protective personal gear or air-purification systems.
"More importantly," Huynh wrote, "these iron green primaries
can be chemically tailored to give a plethora of primaries with
diverse ... explosive performance."
Materials to make the explosive -- iron salt and other elements
-- are available and inexpensive, she said.
The lab owns three patents on the subject.
©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights reserved. Opinions
*****************************************************************
58 Santa Fe New Mexican: Low levels of beryllium discovered at LANL building
Fri Aug 4, 2006 6:03 pm
The Associated Press
LOS ALAMOS -- Los Alamos National Laboratory officials on
Thursday reported the discovery of low levels of beryllium inside
a building that dates to the earliest days of the nuclear-weapons
facility.
Additional tests were ordered to confirm initial results and to
determine if the element is manmade or naturally occurring.
"We don't believe there is any increased health risk," lab
spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said. "The only health risk with
beryllium is if it gets airborne and inhaled. For most people,
it would have to be inhaled in great amounts."
DeLucas said 50 employees worked in Building 210, part of Tech
Area 21. They moved out in late July, before initial test
results were known.
The beryllium was detected July 19 by a lab contractor. The
building was constructed in the mid-1940s, around the time the
laboratory was established for the Manhattan Project, which
built the world's first atomic bomb.
A sweep of the building and another nearby building involved air
sampling and collection of samples from work surfaces. DeLucas
said four of the five samples were slightly above levels where an
item, such as a notebook, would be considered safe enough to take
home.
Employees with health concerns were asked to contact the lab's
occupational physicians.
"Tests can be done to determine if a person is sensitive to
beryllium," DeLucas said.
©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights reserved. Opinions
*****************************************************************
59 Platts: US DOE may sell up to 50 million pounds of uranium - sources
Washington (Platts)--4Aug2006
The US Department of Energy Friday unveiled tentative plans to
sell roughly 50 million pounds of uranium over the next 10 years.
In a closed-door meeting with industry representatives,
agency officials emphasized that the sale plans were far from
definite. But according to several sources who attended the
meeting, DOE said it had several sales goals.
In the short-term, the agency wants to sell up to 5.5
million pounds of U3O8-equivalent between now and 2010 to raise
money it needs to continue to pay USEC Inc. for its work to clean
up DOE uranium contaminated with small amounts of technetium and
for use as stock to down blend the 17.4 metric tons of
high-enriched uranium the department plans to set aside for an
international nuclear fuel bank. Nations that agree to forego
their own reprocessing and uranium enrichment could pull fuel
from the bank.
In the longer term, the source said DOE told them that it is
considering selling 12 million pounds of U3O8-equivalent between
2007 and 2015 to help pay for decommissioning of the Portsmouth,
Ohio, gaseous diffusion plant.
DOE also indicated that a third tranche of some 29 million
pounds of U3O8-equivalent also might be sold between 2007 and
2015, sources said. DOE is asking industry to comment on its
proposals.
--Mike Knapik, mike_knapik@platts.com
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
60 Hanford News: Last incinerator debris removed from Hanford
This story was published Thursday, August 3rd, 2006
By the Herald staff
Fluor Hanford workers recently finished removing 500 tons of
debris left over from the June demolition of the 232-Z
incinerator building at the Plutonium Finishing Plant. The
cleanup project was completed more than two months ahead of
schedule.
An agreement between the state, the Department of Energy and the
Environmental Protection Agency called for DOE to tear down the
building and remove the debris by Sept. 30, 2006. Workers loaded
the last truck with debris last week.
The bulk of the material was disposed of in Hanford's low-level
waste landfill - the Environmental Restoration Disposal
Facility.
From 1963 to 1972, the incinerator burned combustible material
contaminated with plutonium, so the plutonium could be recovered
from the ashes.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
61 Hanford News: DOE's vit plant report available on the Web
This story was published Thursday, August 3rd, 2006
By the Herald staff
The Department of Energy's quarterly report on the status of
building Hanford's waste treatment plant project can be viewed on
the Internet.
The federal department is required by Congress to make the
reports. The report provides a summary of management and
oversight issues and technical reviews, as well as a status on
construction progress, cost and schedule and project challenges.
The report can be found on DOE's Office of River Protection Web
site, www.hanford.gov/orp.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
62 Hanford News: DOE faulted for late contracts; Review urges agency to award
contracts in more timely fashion
This story was published Thursday, August 3rd, 2006
By Nathan Isaacs, Herald staff writer
The Department of Energy needs to figure out how to award its
contracts in a more timely manner, according to a government
review released this week.
The Government Accountability Office reviewed the timeliness of
31 contracts DOE awarded during fiscal years 2002-05, including
a $1.6 billion contract with Washington Closure for the cleanup
along the Columbia River corridor.
The report comes as two of the Hanford nuclear reservation's
four major contracts are about to expire. In September, Fluor
Hanford's contract for cleaning for up the central plateau and
CH2M Hill Hanford Group's contract for cleanup of the tank farms
both expire.
Those contracts are expected to be extended for up to two years
while DOE goes through the process of awarding new contracts.
Of all the reviewed contracts, only three were awarded on time -
complying with DOE's schedule - and two were awarded more than
two years late, including a Hanford contract, GAO said. Fourteen
of them were awarded two months to a year late.
Those delays can increase costs to DOE and the companies that
compete for DOE work, the GAO reported. The agency recommended
DOE develop better ways to measure its timeliness in awarding
contracts and improve how it applies lessons learned from
awarding contracts.
The report mirrors similar recent GAO criticisms of DOE,
including reports on a program to help ill nuclear workers and
on its contracts with small businesses.
In its written response, DOE said it improved the procurement
process prior to the report's release. DOE generally agreed to
the GAO recommendations, but did raise some issues.
The 31 contracts reviewed were among 130 contracts, each worth
$5 million or more, awarded during 2002-05. DOE awarded more
than 5,000 contracts during that time, although most were below
the $5 million threshold.
The 31 contracts added up to $12 billion of $16.3 billion
awarded in the 130 large contracts.
DOE took issue with the number of contracts reviewed, pointing
out they added up to less than 1 percent of the total awarded
during that period. The agency also pointed out that the sample
contained a number of contracts that didn't meet scheduled award
dates because of factors outside DOE control - including
congressional intervention, changing budgets and changes in
requirements or site conditions.
DOE also stated in its letter that the scheduled dates were an
internal planning tool that changed over time.
The report is on the Internet at
www.gao.gov/new.items/d06722.pdf.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
63 DOE: State Energy Advisory Board
FR Doc E6-12629
[Federal Register: August 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 150)]
[Notices] [Page 44275-44276] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04au06-55]
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open teleconference.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference of the State
Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Pub. L. 92- 463; 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of
these teleconferences be announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: August 17, 2006, from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. EDT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Burch, STEAB Designated
Federal Officer, Assistant Manager, Intergovernmental Projects &
Outreach, Golden Field Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 1617
Cole Boulevard, Golden, CO 80401, Telephone 303/275-4801.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant
[[Page 44276]]
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding
goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative policies,
and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as
designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement
Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101- 440).
Tentative Agenda: Update members on routine business matters,
discuss and finalize a resolution that will update and elaborate
on the continued STEAB support for DOE's maintaining funding and
oversight of the Weatherization Assistance Program, and adopt the
resolution.
Public Participation: The teleconference is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral
statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Gary Burch
at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests to make
oral comments must be received five days prior to the conference
call; reasonable provision will be made to include requested
topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to
conduct the call in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly
conduct of business. This notice is being published less than 15
days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues.
Notes: The notes of the teleconference will be available for
public review and copying within 60 days at the Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Issued at Washington, DC, on August 1, 2006.
Rachel Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E6-12629 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
64 DOE: Extension of Comment Period on the Draft Environmental
FR Doc E6-12644
[Federal Register: August 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 150)]
[Notices] [Page 44274] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04au06-53]
Assessment for the Proposed Infrastructure Improvements for the
Yucca Mountain Project, NV AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of comment period extension.
SUMMARY: On July 6, 2006, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
published a Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental
Assessment for the Proposed Infrastructure Improvements for the
Yucca Mountain Project, Nevada, (71 FR 38391) and announced a
30-day public comment period ending August 7, 2006. Subsequently,
the DOE has taken note that the distribution letter attached to
copies of the draft Environmental Assessment (EA) identified a
different end date for the public comment period. Consequently,
DOE is extending the public comment period until August 31, 2006.
DATES: Comments should be submitted to DOE no later than August
31, 2006. DOE will consider comments submitted after this date to
the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Comments, or requests for copies of the draft EA,
should be sent to Dr. Jane Summerson, EA Document Manager, United
States Department of Energy, 1551 Hillshire Drive, Las Vegas, NV
89134. Requests for copies of the draft EA may also be made by
calling 1-800- 225-6972. The draft EA and electronic comment
forms are available at http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov. Comments may
also be faxed to 1-800-967-0739.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Jane Summerson, EA Document
Manager, at the above address or at 1-800-225-6972.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 1, 2006.
Paul M. Golan, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management.
[FR Doc. E6-12644 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
65 DOE: Notice of Public Scoping Meetings for the FutureGen Project
FR Doc E6-12742
[Federal Register: August 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 150)]
[Notices] [Page 44275] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04au06-54] [[Page 44275]]
Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY: National Energy Technology
Laboratory, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of public scoping meetings and opportunity for
comment.
SUMMARY: On Friday, July 28, 2006, the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement for the proposed action of providing up to $700
million of Federal funding for the FutureGen Project (71 FR
42840). The FutureGen Project would comprise the planning,
design, construction and operation by a private sector
organization of a coal-fired electric power and hydrogen gas
production plant integrated with carbon dioxide capture and
geologic sequestration of the captured gas. DOE's National Energy
Technology Laboratory (NETL) is hosting public scoping meetings
near each of the four proposed FutureGen Project sites. Dates,
locations, and information about the public scoping meetings are
contained under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below.
DATES: DOE invites comments on the proposed scope and content of
the EIS from all interested parties. Comments must be received by
September 13, 2006, to ensure consideration. Late comments will
be considered to the extent practicable. DOE also invites members
of the public to participate in public scoping meetings (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) to learn more about the proposed
FutureGen Project and provide oral comments on the alternatives
and environmental issues to be considered.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed scope of the EIS and requests
for copies of the Draft EIS may be submitted by fax
(304-285-4403), e-mail FutureGen.EIS@netl.doe.gov), or a letter
addressed to the NEPA Document Manager for the FutureGen Project:
Mr. Mark L. McKoy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, U.S.
Department of Energy, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507-0880,
Attn: FutureGen Project EIS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comments or requests to
participate in the public scoping process also can be submitted
by contacting Mr. Mark L. McKoy directly at telephone
304-285-4426; toll free number 1-800- 432-8330 (extension 4426);
fax 304-285-4403; or e-mail
FutureGen.EIS@netl.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NETL is hosting four public scoping
meetings to present an overview of the proposed project and to
provide the public with an opportunity to comment and ask
questions. An informal session of the public scoping meetings
will begin at approximately 4 p.m., followed by a formal session
beginning at approximately 7 p.m. Members of the public who wish
to speak at a public scoping meeting should contact Mr. Mark L.
McKoy, either by phone, fax, e-mail, or in writing (see ADDRESSES
in this Notice). Those who do not arrange in advance to speak may
register at a meeting (preferably at the beginning of the
meeting) and may speak after previously scheduled speakers.
Speakers will be given approximately five minutes to present
their comments. Those speakers who want more than five minutes
should indicate the length of time desired in their request.
Depending on the number of speakers, DOE may need to limit all
speakers to five minutes initially and provide second
opportunities as time permits.
Speakers may also provide written materials to supplement their
presentations. Oral and written comments will be given equal
consideration.
State and local elected officials and tribal leaders may be given
priority in the order of those making oral comments.
DOE will begin each meeting with an overview of the proposed
FutureGen Project. The meeting will not be conducted as an
evidentiary hearing, and speakers will not be cross-examined.
However, speakers may be asked questions to help ensure that DOE
fully understands the comments or suggestions. A presiding
officer will establish the order of speakers and provide any
additional procedures necessary to conduct the meeting.
Meeting Schedule Texas--Jewett Date: Tuesday, August 22, 2006.
Time: 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. Place: City of Fairfield's Green Barn
(Fairgrounds Exhibits Bldg.) 839 E. Commerce, Fairfield, Texas
75840. This site is 2.5 miles East of I-45 on Hwy 84 (aka
Commerce Street).
Texas--Odessa Date: Thursday, August 24, 2006.
Time: 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. Place: The CEED (Center for Energy and
Economic Diversification) Building is located at 1400 North FM
1788 in Midland, Texas 79707.
Illinois--Tuscola Date: Thursday, August 29, 2006.
Time: 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. Place: Tuscola Community Building, 122 W.
Central Avenue, Tuscola, IL 61953. (From Interstate 57, take exit
212 to U.S. Highway 36. The Tuscola Community Building is at the
intersection of North Central Avenue and South Main Street.)
Illinois--Mattoon Date: Thursday, August 31, 2006.
Time: 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. Place: Riddle Elementary School, 4201
Western Avenue, Mattoon, IL. (Located at the corner of Western
Avenue and 43rd Street (CR 300E).) All meetings are accessible to
people with disabilities. Any individual with a disability who
requires special assistance, such as a sign language interpreter,
or a translator, please contact Mr.
Mark McKoy, U.S. DOE-NETL, toll free (800) 432-8330 ext. 4426,
fax (304) 285-4403, or via e-mail at FutureGen.EIS@netl.doe.gov
at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting so that arrangements
can be made.
Additional information about FutureGen can be found at these Web
sites: http://www.doe.gov;
http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/futuregen/;
http://www.futuregenalliance.org. Dated: August 1, 2006.
Mark J. Matarrese, Director, Office of Environment, Security,
Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E6-12742 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
66 lamonitor.com: Beryllium found in old DP building
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
Roger Snodgrass, roger@lamonitor.com
A new occurrence of a persistent environmental risk popped up
during the deconstruction and demolition operations in Technical
Area 21 two weeks ago.
Los Alamos National Laboratory reported on Thursday that low
levels of beryllium were detected in Building 210 on the east
end of DP Road.
The laboratory's announcement appeared on its NewsBulletin
website.
Further tests are underway to verify the results and trace the
source, which can be naturally occurring.
The laboratory's preliminary evaluation indicated that enough
beryllium was present in the samples that "something would be
released to the public."
James Rickman, a spokesman for the laboratory said that
referenced threshold would be above something above the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard for
non-berrylium workers - 0.2 micrograms per 100 square
centimeters.
Beryllium has been used at Los Alamos in nuclear weapons
research for years and in the stockpile stewardship program that
began in the 1990s. It is a tough, silver-gray, lightweight
metal, commonly used as the "skull" or "pit-liner" that holds
the plutonium trigger in a nuclear weapon primary.
Beryllium is not radioactive, but the Environmental Protection
Agency's fact sheet lists it as a "probable human carcinogen."
The metal also causes chronic beryllium disease (CBD), a lung
ailment that can be fatal for a small percentage of the
population that is susceptible.
According to the laboratory, symptoms of CBD include "persistent
cough, breathing difficulty, chest pain, fatigue and weight
loss."
Beryllium exposure, or exposure to radioactivity and silica, are
among the prerequisites for Energy Department employees to
qualify for $150,000 lump sum entitlements and medical expenses
under the Energy Employees Illness Compensation Program Act.
The laboratory reported that about 50 employees attend a meeting
about the hazardous material Thursday. The former occupants had
been moved out of the building in July, "before the test results
were known," the laboratory stated. Some of them had worked
there since 1995.
An adjacent structure, Building 14, is also undergoing
additional tests that will include air sampling and surface
swipes. Employees with concerns were advised to contact the
Laboratory's Occupational Medicine office.
The DP (Delta Prime) site at TA-21 was historically the second
main location for plutonium research at the laboratory after
World II, and after near accidents and concerns about fires and
radioactivity releases near the center of the townsite led to
moving the operations to a more remote location.
Remediation work is now underway on the south side of DP Road,
excavating and removing two old dumps containing largely
undocumented wastes from early post-war chemical and
radiological activities at the DP site.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
67 TDP: Uranium leasing program sees two opposite views
Telluride Daily Planet
By Bob Beer
Published: Thursday, August 3, 2006 7:15 PM CDT
Tuesday night's public comment hearing in Norwood on the U.S.
Department of Energy's Uranium Leasing program saw two distinct
views - those who want to see uranium mining continue in
Southwest Colorado's uranium mineral belt, and those who want to
see it either stopped or curtailed.
About a dozen people spoke at the Tuesday meeting, with almost 30
in attendance.
Alta Lakes resident Chuck Burr chastised the DOE representatives
for not holding a public hearing in Telluride, where, he said,
almost $1 billion in real estate sales occur annually which could
be affected by mining in the West End.
Burr said DOE had "completely mis-scoped" its Draft Programmatic
Environmental Assessment, which states that "radiation exposure
would not exceed MSHA (the mining industry's OSHA) values ... for
a [current] workforce of 186, over 10 years. The probability of
less than one additional latent cancer fatality over and above
what is expected..."
Burr said the half-life of radioactive materials could affect the
health of 10,000 generations into the future.
"You need to do a study of all the generations affected," he
said.
But Mike Moore, president of Western Small Miners Association,
said there are many more deaths associated with smoking or
vehicle accidents and "we're not going to stop that."
He also said the town of Telluride wouldn't even exist if it
weren't for its mining past.
It was noted that the price of uranium has risen dramatically in
the recent past due to stockpiles of the ore used in nuclear
reactors and some weapons numbers having been reduced.
But some questioned the safety of uranium mining as well as
nuclear reactors in the United States and around the world.
"If you can show me 20 (uranium) miners in this area who are
still alive, maybe they'd have a different perspective," said
Telluride resident Chris Myers.
Myers also noted that Germany will abandon its nuclear reactors
in the near future.
However, Scott Hill, manager of a uranium group out of Salt Lake
City, said "new nuclear power plants are at least three
generations from Three-Mile Island," the reactor that failed more
than 20 years ago. "To assume this generation of nuclear power
plants is not safe is wrong."
A Norwood resident, Jerry Bunker, said residents of Telluride who
oppose uranium mining should look at their actions first before
telling others how to live.
Bunker challenged Telluride area residents to do an environmental
study to see the effects of the many festivals and their
attendant camping.
"You kill more plants and destroy more land" with real estate
development in the east end of the county than mining would do in
the West End, he said.
"You don't take care of your own land," he said, adding "do you
study the bird that is killed because a tree is cut down?"
Norwood resident John Huebner said he was concerned over the
transportation routes.
Although both are currently closed, low-grade uranium ore has
been transported to either the Ca¤on City mill across the
Continental Divide or the White Mesa Mill near Blanding, Utah. In
addition, due to the two closest mills being temporarily closed,
there is no active uranium mining in the area currently.
San Miguel County Commissioner Art Goodtimes, who lives just
outside of Norwood, said he has evolved his thinking about the
nuclear energy industry from when "I came here as an anti-nuclear
activist" three decades ago.
However, he said as long as the problem of what to do with the
radioactive wastes from nuclear energy remains, it was
irresponsible for the federal government to entertain expanding
uranium mining.
But he also noted that a coal-fired generating plant produces
more radiation than a nuclear power plant.
Goodtimes also called for the DOE to conduct an Environmental
Impact Study of the uranium mining industry in the area, rather
than the less-extensive Environmental Assessment that has been
done.
For example, he said, the assumption of the transportation routes
of the ore was problematic because "we don't know where the
trucks would go."
"That has huge implications" for the possible transportation
problems in the area, he said, adding that was another reason for
conducting an EIS, rather than the current EA.
He also suggested there should be a fourth alternative. The draft
Programmatic Environmental Assessment includes three
alternatives: Expanded Program Alternative, which would extend
the current leases for 10 years and expand the program by leasing
the inactive lease tracts to the domestic uranium industry
through a competitive bidding process; the Existing Program
Alternative, which would extend the current leases for probably
10 years; and the No Action Alternative, which would allow the
current leases to expire the first of next year.
Currently there are 13 active leases on lands in San Miguel, Mesa
and Montrose counties. The leases are set to expire the first of
next year. There are also 25 lease tracts that are currently
inactive, and some of those mines have been reclaimed.
Goodtimes suggested a fourth alternative, where the government
would hold the leases and if the technical problems concerning
radioactive wastes were solved, then approve expanding the mining
industry.
He also said he disagreed with the notion that increased job
opportunities associated with expanding the uranium mining
industry in the area was a good thing.
"We don't need more jobs," he said, "we need more housing."
The public will have another opportunity to comment on the
Programmatic Environmental Assessment at the BOCC's Aug. 16
meeting.
The public comment period, due to increased pressure from local
governments, has been extended to Aug. 25.
Until that time, comments may be sent by calling 1.800.399.5618,
via fax at 970.248.6040 or by mailing to: Uranium Leasing PEA
Comments, U.S. Department of Energy, 2597 B3/4 Road, Grand
Junction, CO 81503.
Additional information about the Uranium Leasing Program is
available online at:
http://www.lm.doe.gov/land/sites/uranium_leasing/uranium_leasing.htm.
*****************************************************************
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more
information go to:
*****************************************************************