Area nuclear plants to get guard towers
The Patriot-News, 2002
Saturday, July 24, 2004
BY GARRY LENTON
Of The Patriot-News
Guard towers will soon rise over the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant,
part of a series of security upgrades required by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
Exelon Nuclear will spend $70 million to install a series of 25-foot guard
towers at its 10 nuclear plants, including TMI, Peach Bottom and the
Limerick plant in Montgomery County near Philadelphia.
The towers, which will be fortified to withstand bullets but not
rocket-propelled grenades, are being required by the nuclear regulatory
agency.
Advertisement
The towers are a response to demands for better security against terrorist
assaults at the nation's 103 commercial nuclear power plants. Details of
those requirements were never revealed by the agency, but Exelon confirmed
the requirement for guard towers yesterday.
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the agency has required more security
guards, better weapons, stricter background checks and greater restrictions
on who may enter the plants. But the details of those requirements were
never revealed by the agency.
Exelon would not say how many guards each tower will house.
"I can only say that this new [level of threat] we have to defend against
requires these installations," said Craig Nesbitt, a spokesman for Exelon
Nuclear, owner of the plants.
"It's a great idea," said Scott Portzline, a Harrisburg activist who has
studied nuclear plant security and lobbied the industry and the nuclear
regulatory agency for better security since the early 1990s. "This is
something I recommended back in 1993."
TMI will get six towers. Four of those will be 25 feet tall and will be
placed around the plant's protected area, which houses most of the vital
buildings, Nesbitt said. Two smaller towers will be set inside the protected
area.
One of those shorter towers will be placed at a vehicle checkpoint on the
other side of the bridge onto TMI. The second will be placed at the south
entrance to the plant, which is rarely used.
The Peach Bottom plant in York County will get nine towers. Exelon also will
build a training center at Peach Bottom for firearms training, Nesbitt said.
The Limerick plant will get seven guard towers and an 84,000-square-foot
training center.
Other planned security improvements include:
* An additional ring of concrete barriers around vital areas of the
plants. They will be outside existing barriers. The move is designed to make
it harder for commandos to get a bomb close enough to the plant to damage
it, Nesbitt said.
* Permanent barriers will be installed at vehicle checkpoints, and a roof
will be added to move vehicles out of the weather during searches. Employee
vehicles and others that enter the protected area of the plant are searched,
requiring the occupants to get out of the car.
* So-called "delay fencing" will be added to some areas of the plants.
TMI has a double fence surrounding the most critical areas of the plant.
Some areas of that fence line still deemed vulnerable will get additional
fencing.
A delay fence is designed to slow attackers and give defense forces more
time to respond.
"We're trying to keep any explosives well away from the site, and slow down
any invasion," Nesbitt said.
The guard towers will give security forces greater visibility and better
protection from attackers, Portzline said.
"Guards can't run fast enough to cover the territory they need to," he said.
"But with guard towers they can monitor the space between [perimeter fences]
and eliminate the commando threat with an automatic weapon."
GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com
*****************************************************************
16 Fredericksburg.com: North Anna gets high marks in readiness
Drills prove nuclear power plant prepared for any emergency,
regulatory officials announce.
By JEFF BRANSCOME
Date published: 7/24/2004
People living near the North Anna nuclear power plant in Louisa
County shouldn't worry about being exposed to radiation,
government officials say.
The plant and its surrounding counties, they say, are prepared to
respond to any emergency, whether it's due to an accident,
equipment failure or terrorist attack.
On Tuesday, officials from the Nuclear Regulatory Agency tested
North Anna's ability to respond to an emergency involving
radiation release outside the plant.
The Virginia Department of Emergency Management also graded the
plant's surrounding counties on their ability to respond to such
a predicament.
The agencies released preliminary results of the emergency drill
yesterday at the Holiday Inn Select in Central Park, and a final
report will be released in 90 days.
Robert Frojonowski of the NRC said the plant's employees received
high marks. During the drill, employees had to identify the
accident, determine its severity and fix the problem, he said.
"This was a good test of the emergency plan, and they
satisfactorily met all of our requirements," he said.
The plant, on the Louisa County shore of Lake Anna, has two
nuclear reactors and has been preparing for emergencies since the
first unit went online in 1978, according to Richard Zuercher,
spokesman for Dominion Virginia Power.
Darrell Hammons, a spokesman for the VDEM, said nearby counties
also are adequately prepared to respond to an emergency.
Under the emergency plan, five localities--Spotsylvania, Louisa,
Caroline, Orange and Hanover counties--would be involved.
Localities contribute law enforcement, emergency services,
evacuation sites and logistical aid.
"Based on our instant analysis, we find that they are able to
protect the health and safety of the public living within a
10-mile evacuation zone," he said.
Exercises simulating potential emergencies are conducted every
other year at North Anna.
"Usually, everybody learns something from these lessons,"
Frojonowski said.
Bill Renz, Dominion's director of nuclear protective services,
agrees.
"You're always looking for areas to improve," he said.
Tuesday's drill was not conducted in response to recent terrorist
warnings, Frojonowski said, "although that's what people are
turning it into."
He said a strike from a jumbo jet probably would not breach a
reactor containment shell, which includes a steel-reinforced
concrete dome up to 5 feet thick and a steel-encased cocoon that
contains the reactor.
To reach JEFF BRANSCOME: 540/374-5000, ext. 5710
Date published: 7/24/2004
Fredericksburg.com, 605 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401
Comments? Send us Feedback, Phone: 540-368-5055 To contact all
other newspaper departments, please call 540-374-5000. Copyright
2004, The Free Lance-Star Publishing Co. of Fredericksburg, Va.
*****************************************************************
17 Haaretz: Vanunu tells Al Hayat: Dimona reactor endangers millions
News Updates Sun., July 25, 2004 Av 7, 5764 Israel Time:
By Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service
Nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu says the Dimona nuclear
reactor endangers the lives of millions throughout the Middle
East, Army Radio reported late Saturday.
In an interview published Sunday with the London-based
Arabic-language newspaper Al Hayat, that a strong earthquake in
the region may crack the reactor, causing radioactive leakage
that would result in the death of millions.
Al-Hayat claims that this is the first interview Vanunu has given
to a newspaper since his release from an Israeli prison in April,
Israel Radio reported. If Vanunu did in fact give the interview,
it could constitute a violation of the limitations placed upon
him by the Shin Bet upon his release from prison.
Vanunu also told the paper that the Jordanian government should
prepare for possible leaks from the reactor, just as Israel has
plans to distribute iodine anti-radiation pills to residents
living close to the nuclear reactor in Dimona. He said that
Jordanians living close to the border with Israel should be
examined for possible nuclear radiation, explaining that the
Hashemite Kingdom is particularly at risk from the reactor as it
operates mainly when "the wind blows toward Jordan."
He said he does not believe that the United States and European
nations will pressure Israel into revealing the full extent of
its nuclear capabilities. Vanunu also took the opportunity to
blast United Nations nuclear watchdog chief Mohammed El Baradei
for visiting Israel earlier this month and not putting any
pressure on it to open up its nuclear program to international
inspection. "He should have done here what he did in Iraq," he
was quoted as saying.
The former nuclear technician was freed in April after serving 18
years for revealing Israel's nuclear secrets to the Sunday Times
of London.
Vanunu went on to say that he told the Sunday Times all he knew
and that the information he had "was enough to conclude that
Israel presents a real danger to the entire Middle East." He also
said that he believes Israel has managed to build up its nuclear
arsenal in the years in which he was incarcerated.
Mordechai Vanunu told the London-based Al Hayat that millions
in the Middle East are at risk from Israel's nuclear weapons.
(AP)
© Copyright Haaretz. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
18 Guardian Unlimited: Investors oppose BE rescue plan
Special report: economics
Terry Macalister
Monday July 26, 2004
The Guardian
Government hopes of getting an easy ride over the restructuring
of British Energy (BE) have been thrown into chaos with rebel
shareholders agitating to throw out last year's restructuring
plan.
With the European commission still to give the green light to
last year's rescue plan, a hedge fund called Polygon and
long-term BE investor Invesco Perpetual are together trying to
unwind the October deal.
The two equity holders, with more than 11% of the nuclear
generator, want to buyout bondholders with a cash offer of up to
£800m and seize back 30% of the company.
The hedge fund said yesterday it was pressing to bring more
shareholders on board and would vote against the BE proposals if
there is any meeting to discuss delisting the group from the
stock market.
There are also signs that the rebels are willing to try to turn
the issue into a political case by arguing that the government
stands to effectively win 65% control of future earnings while
230,000 small shareholders lose out with a tiny 2.5% of the new
equity.
The dissident shareholders are aware that the government changed
its mind over Rail track and eventually moved to offer them
compensation.
But BE argues that it cannot unwind a binding restructuring plan
that saved the firm from going into administration as wholesale
power prices had collapsed.
Since this time wholesale electricity prices have increased
dramatically but sources close to BE said trying to throw out an
agreement signed in October when things were different was like
"trying to bet on the Grand National while the race was already
in progress".
The company will have to call an extraordinary general meeting
for shareholders to formally agree its restructuring. This is
expected once - and if - it gets the go ahead from Brussels.
That gives the opportunity for shareholders such as Polygon to
vote against the board's proposals although BE has warned it will
take the company off the stock market if it faces opposition to
its plans.
Opponents say this loophole - whereby companies can delist
without shareholder approval - will be closed in 2005 but BE
seems prepared to take this action before such legislation is
introduced.
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
HSE nuclear glossary
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
19 JOURNAL NEWS: Nuclear plant considered as target
By ROGER WITHERSPOON
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: July 24, 2004)
The 9/11 Commission Report has confirmed something long feared
since the terrorist attacks: The plot's ringleader had considered
crashing a jet into a nuclear power plant.
The report states that Mohamed Atta, who piloted one of the
planes that hit the World Trade Center, "considered targeting a
nuclear facility he had seen during familiarization flights near
New York."
The nuclear plant was not identified, but the report says the
plotters already had agreed to target the World Trade Center and
rented planes from Teterboro Airport in northern New Jersey.
Their test flights included trips along the Hudson River air
corridor, the report states. The Indian Point nuclear power
plants in Buchanan are about 35 miles from Manhattan. Other area
nuclear power plants Oyster Creek and Salem in southern New
Jersey and James A. FitzPatrick in Oswego are more than 100
miles from the World Trade Center.
Other pilots involved in the terrorist plot were opposed to
Atta's plan to strike such a target, according to the
commission's final report, "because the airspace around it was
restricted, making reconnaissance flights impossible and
increasing the likelihood that any plane would be shot down
before impact."
"Moreover, unlike the approved targets," the report states, "this
alternative had not been discussed with senior al-Qaeda leaders
and therefore did not have the requisite blessing. Nor would a
nuclear facility have particular symbolic value."
The information contained in the 567-page report, released
Thursday, produced conflicting reactions yesterday from Indian
Point supporters and opponents.
"Residents in the counties can be reassured that these plants are
not the attractive targets that some people take them to be,"
said Jim Steets, spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which
owns the twin reactors at Indian Point.
"We have always felt that they are not vulnerable to that type of
attack," Steets said, "and that is why we have security. And
since 9/11, we have spent millions and millions of dollars on
enhancements to both the security and the physical infrastructure
defenses of Indian Point."
U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel, D-Bronx, said the region surrounding
Indian Point was fortunate the terrorist planners overestimated
the defensive capabilities of nuclear power plants.
"They thought a nuclear target would be difficult because the
airspace is restricted," Engel said. "Before Sept. 11, all of us
had the false feeling that a plane could not hit all these
targets because surely we would have some plan in place where the
planes would be shot down. But we learned quickly that if someone
violated airspace, there were no plans to shoot down planes in
time. There really were no no-fly zones around nuclear power
plants."
Nuclear power plants do not have anti-missile protection and are
not likely to get them.
"We oppose the use of anti-missile batteries at nuclear plant
sites," said Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. "You would have to have officials available 24 hours
a day to make snap decisions whether a plane crossing into the
airspace was deemed to be a threat. We don't believe that is a
practical approach."
Sheehan said the focus should be on improving airport scrutiny of
passengers and planes to prevent hijackings.
Kyle Rabin, of the environmental group Riverkeeper, a leader in
the movement to close Indian Point, said more needed to be done
to ensure the plants were secure from attacks by the air or from
the Hudson River.
"Terrorists used the Hudson River corridor for training, and it
is obvious that Indian Point was in their cross hairs and remains
an attractive target for terrorists," Rabin said.
Congress yesterday forwarded to the White House legislation
requiring the Coast Guard to assess the security of all nuclear
power plants located on major waterways. The House bill,
initiated by Engel, initially dealt only with Indian Point but
was expanded in the Senate version to include all nuclear plants.
The House then adopted the Senate version.
"Post-9/11, we have to be extra careful when it comes to
security," Engel said. "We have overlooked the danger to nuclear
plants from the air, and we ought to think about the possibility
of attacks from the water."
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., who sponsored the Senate
bill, said all necessary steps must be taken to safeguard nuclear
power plants from attack.
"Indian Point and New York's other nuclear power plants are all
located on the water, and it is important that the Coast Guard
evaluate whether they are vulnerable to terrorist attack from the
water," she said.
Copyright 2004 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper
*****************************************************************
20 TheChamplainChannel.com: NRC Meets About Cracks In Vermont Yankee
UPDATED: 8:45 am EDT July 24, 2004
VERNON, Vt. -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has asked for
more information about cracks in the Vermont Yankee nuclear power
plant's steam dryer.
The steam dryer was the subject of two top-level, closed-door
meetings at NRC headquarters outside Washington this week.
After the meetings with Entergy and General Electric, an NRC
official said additional information is still needed.
Earlier this month, the commission said the cracking was the
biggest obstacle to Entergy Nuclear's plans to boost power at
Vermont Yankee.
The cracking could result in pieces breaking off and falling into
the steam lines that lead out of the reactor.
Several reactors in Illinois have been forced to shut down
because of similar cracking.
Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
21 albawaba.com: Israel nuclear whistleblower: Dimona reactor
endangers millions; warns Jordan of leaks
Al Bawaba - Middle East News and Information
25-07-2004, 08:20
Nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu said in an interview that
the Dimona nuclear reactor endangers the lives of millions
throughout the Middle East.
In an interview published Sunday with London-based Al Hayat, he
said that a strong earthquake in the region may crack the
reactor, causing radioactive leakage that would result in the
death of millions of people.
Al-Hayat claims that this is the first interview Vanunu has given
to a newspaper since his release from an Israeli prison in April.
Vanunu also told the newspaper that the Jordanian government
should prepare for possible leaks from the reactor, just as
Israel has plans to distribute iodine anti-radiation pills to
residents living close to the nuclear reactor in Dimona.
He said that Jordanians living close to the border with Israel
should be examined for possible nuclear radiation, explaining
that the Hashemite Kingdom is especially at risk from the reactor
as it operates mainly when "the wind blows toward Jordan."
According to the report, he added he does not believe that the
United States and European nations will pressure Israel into
revealing the full extent of its nuclear capabilities.
Vanunu also took the opportunity to slam UN nuclear watchdog head
Mohammed El Baradei for visiting Israel earlier this month and
not exerting any pressure on it to open up its nuclear program to
international inspection. "He should have done here what he did
in Iraq," he was quoted as saying.
The former nuclear technician was freed in April after serving 18
years for disclosing Israel's nuclear secrets to the British
Sunday Times. (Albawaba.com)
© 2004 Al Bawaba
*****************************************************************
22 UK Independent: Rebel investors attack British Energy rescue
By Stephen Foley
26 July 2004
Rebel investors have launched a campaign to scrap the proposed
£5bn rescue deal at British Energy, the nuclear power generator,
which would leave shareholders owning just 2.5 per cent of the
company.
Polygon Investments, a UK hedge fund owning 5.6 per cent of
British Energy shares, says the restructuring is "worse than a
mugging" for shareholders, and is offering to underwrite a new
refinancing deal.
Polygon's proposals were initially given short shrift by British
Energy, but over the weekend a big institutional shareholder -
Invesco, with 6 per cent - indicated its willingness to support
a refinancing and Polygon urged other investors to join its
campaign.
British Energy was insisting yesterday that the rebel
shareholders' plan was a non-starter. "We had to sign binding
agreements with creditors last October," the company said in a
statement. "We now have an obligation to implement that
agreement." The company is furious at the idea that shareholders
who refused to refinance the company when it fell into
difficulties in 2002 are now hoping to claw back some of the
value they have lost.
Under current plans, shareholders will be left with a maximum of
2.5 per cent of a refinanced British Energy, with the Government
holding a majority stake and bondholders taking up to 33 per
cent. Since the deal, a revival in wholesale electricity prices
has improved British Energy's fortunes. As a result, the
company's equity is more attractive and its bonds, which will be
swapped for shares, are trading at an 80 per cent premium to
their face value.
The refinancing hammered out with the Government and bondholders
says that the company will be delisted from the stock market if
shareholders do not approve the deal. Polygon is claiming that a
stock market rule change, which comes into force this year and
which requires companies to get shareholder approval before
delisting, means that British Energy could not delist. If the
rule change comes in time, Polygon says it will vote against the
deal, but it is also hoping shareholders will put pressure on
the Government to renegotiate.
One Polygon insider said: "The creditors have carried out more
than a mugging, nicking this company off 230,000 private
shareholders and some grown-up institutions. No alternative is a
non-starter when the Government is going to end up owning 65 per
cent of the company."
British Energy said: "Without an agreement in October, we would
have faced administration and shareholders the likelihood of no
return at all. What they are getting under the proposals is more
than shareholders have got in recent similar situations."
UK Independent Ltd.
*****************************************************************
23 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear plant backed by Blair is £600m 'white elephant'
Sellafield factory has failed to produce any
reprocessed fuel since opening in 2001
Paul Brown and Rob Evans
Monday July 26, 2004
The Guardian
A nuclear fuel factory which was personally approved by Tony
Blair has so far cost the taxpayer more than £600m - and rising -
without producing a single saleable item, a Guardian
investigation has established.
The factory at Sellafield in Cumbria was designed to process
plutonium and uranium from used nuclear fuel rods to power
reactors for overseas customers of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL),
but it is eight years behind schedule.
The Guardian has learned that the prime minister brushed aside
the doubts of ministers to order the plant to begin production in
2001, after a four-year wrangle within Whitehall. Ministers had
warned Mr Blair that the factory would be a financial disaster.
With the support of the trade secretary, Patricia Hewitt, Mr
Blair also overrode opposition from the Irish and Norwegian
governments and green campaigners who protested that the factory
would cause radioactive contamination of the environment.
The scale of the factory's financial woes is only now coming to
light. It has emerged that the factory, which started up in
December 2001, is not yet working properly and has yet to produce
any revenue.
BNFL has been forced to halt all production for several months to
carry out "modifications and improvement".
But the public purse will continue to be drained as Stephen
Timms, the energy minister, has conceded that the plant is not
expected to be operating fully until the end of 2005 at the
earliest. In the meantime, BNFL has to pay for the upkeep of the
factory, including the wages of hundreds of workers.
The disclosures come soon after Mr Blair announced that he was
considering building a new generation of nuclear power stations
as a way of controlling climate change.
The idea behind the factory is to use plutonium and uranium
recovered from reprocessing, which would otherwise be useless, to
make a new form of nuclear fuel. The factory is generally known
as the Mox plant because the fuel is made from mixed oxides of
plutonium and uranium.
BNFL built the Mox plant in the 1990s with taxpayers' money.
Plutonium and uranium stockpiled at Sellafield, Cumbria, for
foreign customers from Japan, Germany, Switzerland and Sweden
could be returned to them as useful fuel.
The Mox plant was also supposed to be the flagship foreign
exchange earner for the beleaguered state-owned BNFL. Instead, it
has pushed the already technically bankrupt company further into
the red, with the company's chief executive blaming part of the
company's £310m loss this year on the failure of the plant.
The depth of BNFL's troubles was underlined this year when the
company, in the absence of any product from the plant, was forced
to contract out orders and buy batches of readymade Mox fuel from
Belgium to sell on to one of its overseas customers and keep them
satisfied. The cost of this emergency manoeuvre is being kept
secret.
Documents passed to the Guardian show that before the plant began
operations, the government was told that only four countries
might place orders with the Mox plant.
These forecasts were contained in telegrams sent back to London
by British diplomats in nine countries who had been asked to
assess markets for the Mox fuel.
Japan was seen as vital to the success of the plant. Norman
Askew, then chief executive of BNFL, said in September 2000:
"Without Japanese orders, we cannot justify opening the Mox
plant. We have until about next January or February to convince
the Japanese, otherwise we will have to abandon the project."
An optimistic assessment from the British embassy in Japan said
Japan's Mox programme would proceed "more or less on schedule",
but this has proved to be wrong. Even the pro-Mox lobby in Japan
now thinks that Japan cannot place any orders until 2007, and
even then the fuel will be supplied by France, not BNFL.
BNFL has always claimed that there would be enough orders to make
the plant pay. But today, there have been just two - from Germany
and from Sweden. The value of both orders is secret. Although
there are still no orders from Japan, BNFL remains confident that
the chances of getting them are "robust".
Mr Blair decided to press ahead with Mox three years ago despite
warnings from ministers and officials that the plant would be a
financial white elephant. He made his decision on the basis of
two papers by financial advisers, kept secret by the government.
Critics outside the government also criticised the financial
calculations to justify the existence of the Mox plant.
Martin Forwood, of Cumbrians Opposed to Radioactive Environment,
called them "voodoo economics", while Charles Secrett, then
director of Friends of the Earth, termed them "Alice in
Wonderland" mathematics.
The opponents' assessment was based on the fact that the
construction costs of the plant, by then being quoted as £472m,
were ignored in the official calculations of future profit or
loss. Even then, only counting the operating costs, the plant is
only officially forecast to make £216m profit in its lifetime -
assuming there were enough foreign orders to keep it working for
10 years.
A No 10 spokesman refused to comment on Mr Blair's role in
approving the Mox plant.
A spokesman for the Department of Trade and Industry, which is
responsible for BNFL, said : "The economic and environmental case
for the [Mox plant] remains as strong as ever. The plant turns
plutonium and uranium into fuel and will help to transform the
world's plutonium into electricity."
A BNFL spokesman said : "Our economic assessment shows that there
is still a sound economic case for the plant. Furthermore, the
operation of the plant is important to provide a route to return
plutonium to overseas customers."
He added that the delays in operating the plant were because of
"extended regulatory and government approval processes". He also
said that production has been halted for "modifications and
improvement", delaying the delivery of the first batch of Mox
fuel.
Mr Blair had repeatedly run into stiff opposition from the Irish
government when he decided to go ahead with the plant, as shown
in documents released to the Guardian under the Irish Freedom of
Information Act. Bertie Ahern, the Irish prime minister, told Mr
Blair of his government's "total opposition, dismay and
disappointment" in a private meeting in October 2001. Mr Ahern
was worried that the Mox plant would "perpetuate" the life of the
Sellafield complex and leave more radioactive pollution on Irish
shores.
According to one document, the Irish, persistent opponents of
BNFL, argued that the Mox plant "would add to the multiplicity of
facilities and operations at Sellafield, thereby increasing
accident/security threat".
BNFL's order book
The hopes and reality.
Japan
British embassy, Tokyo, reported "confidence in Japan that the
Mox programme will go ahead more or less on schedule". It
initially predicted the first Mox fuel would be loaded by 2001,
and there would be a steady rise to 16-18 reactors using Mox by
2010.
Current situation: No Mox is in use in Japan, and none is
expected before 2007. There are no orders for BNFL.
Germany
British embassy, Berlin: "Existing contracts between German
utilities and BNFL envisage plutonium will be converted into
Mox".
Current situation: One contract signed between a German utility
company and BNFL, which BNFL says is 15% of the necessary order
book to break even.
Canada
British embassy, Ottawa: "There is considerable public disquiet
over the very limited nature of Canadian testing of Mox fuel.
There are cheaper alternatives available in this energy-rich
country. We see no prospect for BNFL in this market".
Current situation: No orders for BNFL
France, Netherlands, Spain and Italy
Embassies reported that there was little likelihood of orders
from any of these countries at present or in the future. France
makes its own Mox fuel at two sites.
Current situation: No orders for BNFL
Graphics The Mox ships' journey around the world (pdf) Nuclear
map of Britain US nuclear map
Useful links British Energy Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace HSE nuclear glossary UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board Friends of the Earth World
Nuclear Association World Nuclear Transport Institute
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
24 Radiation: Internal Emitter Risk Higher than Thought
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 17:09:24 -0500 (CDT)
(this is of course relevant to the issue of depleted uranium, which
has a similar (though less intense) radiation profile. Whatever
risk multiplier they wind up using for plutonium should probably
be used with DU as well. In any case the "offical" standards will
probably be a whitewash. Radiation science has been heavily
politicized and corrupted for a long time. -rw)
NewScientist.com
Plutonium cancer risk may be higher than thought
09:30 18 July 04
Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4
free issues.
Plutonium may be many times more dangerous than previously thought.
The cancer risk from exposure inside the body could be 10 times
higher than is allowed for in calculating international safety
limits.
The danger is highlighted in a report written by radiation experts
for the UK government, which has been leaked to New Scientist. The
experts are unanimous in saying that low-level radiation emitted
by plutonium may cause more damage to human cells than previously
believed. Their opinion could provoke a rethink of the guidelines
on exposure to radiation.
Several tonnes of plutonium have been released into the environment
over the last 60 years by nuclear weapons tests and nuclear plants.
Concern over the harmfulness of plutonium is growing because of
discoveries about the subtle effects of low-level radiation.
Researchers in Europe and North America have shown that the descendants
of cells that seem to survive radiation unharmed can suffer delayed
damage, a phenomenon called "genomic instability" (New Scientist
print edition, 20 January 2001).
Bystander effect
Cells adjacent to those that are irradiated can also sustain damage,
known as "the bystander effect". And an increase was found in the
number of mutations in small pieces of DNA called mini-satellites
that are passed from one generation to the next. The fear is that
these effects could trigger cancers and other ill effects.
The report, which is due to be published in the next few months,
has been drawn up by the Committee Examining Radiation Risks from
Internal Emitters (CERRIE). The committee includes 12 specialists
from the UK government's National Radiological Protection Board,
the nuclear industry, universities and environmental groups.
All members of the committee agree that the margin of uncertainty
over the risks of plutonium and similar radionuclides inside the
body "could extend over at least an order of magnitude".
This "should be borne in mind by those making judgements and policy
decisions on low-level internal radiation", says CERRIE's chairman,
Dudley Goodhead, the former director of the UK Medical Research
Council's Radiation and Genome Stability Unit at Harwell in
Oxfordshire.
Rob Edwards
Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
*****************************************************************
25 [progchat_action] BREAKING: Washington Shuts Nuke Facilities in
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 01:22:14 -0500 (CDT)
BREAKING: Washington Shuts Nuke Facilities in
Security Scare
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/072504Y.shtml
Click to SUBSCRIBE ->
mailto:join-three-to@lists.truthout.org
Go direct to our HomePage : http://www.truthout.org
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/XgSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/progchat_action/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
progchat_action-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
26 RACHEL'S NEWS - FIERY HELL ON EARTH - Nuclear Proliferation
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 11:25:32 -0500 (CDT)
May - July 2004
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS
http://www.rachel.org
FIERY HELL ON EARTH
"For some time now, I have been searching for answers to a
deeply perplexing question: Why is the United States promoting
the spread of atomic bombs worldwide?
By "atomic bombs" I mean the kind that turned Hiroshima and
Nagasaki into a fiery hell in 1945 -- A-bombs made from
plutonium (Nagasaki) or "enriched" uranium (Hiroshima).
In this series, I will briefly examine the facts, then consider
some of the possible reasons why the U.S. might favor the
proliferation of atomic weapons worldwide."
Edited by Peter Montague
Rachel's #792: Fiery Hell on Earth, Part 1
Rachel's #793: Fiery Hell on Earth, Part 2
Rachel's #794: Fiery Hell on Earth, Part 3
Rachel's #795: Fiery Hell on Earth, Part 4
Rachel's #796: Fiery Hell on Earth, Part 5
All attached
-------------
Reply-To: