*****************************************************************
06/05/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.133
*****************************************************************
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 [NYTr] Former CIA Analyst: Iran Strike fet For June or July
2 IPS-English GULF-IRAN: GCC urges Iran to cooperate with IAEA
3 Guardian Unlimited: Envoy to Show Iranians Anti-Uranium Deal
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran has weeks to settle nuclear dispute, says R
5 IRNA: Diplomat: Iranians intent on regaining their legitimate rights
6 IRNA: Rafsanjani dismisses enemies' show of publicity against Iran -
7 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI has been acting on int'l norms
8 AFP: EU's Solana due in Tehran to submit nuclear proposal
9 AFP: EU's Solana in Iran to present nuclear proposal
10 AFP: US sweetens offer to Iran: diplomats
11 AFP: Hopeful US urges patience on Iran
12 US: Boston Globe: Bar group will review Bush's legal challenges -
NUCLEAR REACTORS
13 The Australian: MP rejects nuclear plant | |
14 SABCnews.com: Pebble reactors could be answer to energy needs
15 The Australian: Bishop dismisses nuke site call
16 The Australian: Coal hits back at nuclear power
17 AU The Age: Nuclear power inquiry in hands of guarded supporter -
18 Australian Financial Review: NIMBY states close ranks over reactors
19 Sydney Morning Herald: Reactor sites not included in inquiry -
20 AU The Age: Victoria rejects nuclear power push -
21 AU The Age: Nuclear power 'not on' -
22 Sydney Morning Herald: Cabinet to consider nuclear inquiry -
23 Sydney Morning Herald: No nuclear plant while I'm in charge -
24 AU: The Age: Rooftops 'a powerful energy source'
25 AU ABC: MP rejects nuclear proposal for Goulburn
26 AU ABC: Java nuclear plans 'should worry NT'
27 UPI: Britain's nuclear energy costs soar
28 US: Western Herald: Environmentalists and plant officials debate on
29 BBC: Osirak: Over the reactor
30 US: DFP: Nuclear power is no pretty picture; it comes with great ris
31 US: NRC: Peach Bottom Docket
32 US: NRC: Yankee Atomic Electric Company; Yankee Atomic Independent S
33 US: NRC: Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generat
34 AFP: Greenpeace protests third-generation nuclear plant in Finland -
35 US: NRC: RIC 2006 Conference Program
36 AK&M: Rosatom considers constructing 2-4 power units more at Kalinin
37 NEWS.com.au: Howard is drifting without an agenda -
38 AU ABC: Nuclear power viable, ANSTO says
39 AU ABC: Expert foresees problems in nuclear power regulation
40 AU ABC: Nuclear reactor not welcome in Goulburn, mayor says.
41 AU ABC: PM warns against nuclear 'fear campaign'.
42 AU ABC: Credibility of nuclear report questioned
43 AU ABC: Nuclear proposal dangerous for SA: Rann.
44 AU ABC: ANSTO dismisses conflict of interest claims.
45 AU ABC: Nuclear power could 'damage' international relations.
46 AU ABC: No list of possible nuclear sites, minister says.
47 India: The Telegraph: More nuke plants in pipeline
48 Guardian: Comment is free: The nuclear reaction
49 The Australian: Solar power 'part of nuclear debate' | |
50 The Australian: Abbott OK with nuclear power | |
51 The Australian: Cabinet to consider nuclear inquiry | |
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
52 US: FW: TMI Health Shadow
53 US: New York Times: Indian-Americans Test Their Clout on Atom Pact -
54 US: NRC: NRC Proposes Changes to Regulations on Occupational Radiati
55 US: ICT: 'Divine Strake' detonation halted
56 US: KRNV.com: Tribal leaders lead protest Nevada Test Site's `Divine
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
57 US: World Uranium Resources Ample For Projected Nuclear Energy Needs
58 US: Guardian Unlimited: Envoy to Show Iranians Anti-Uranium Deal
59 US: AU ABC: Clean-up plan for Kakadu uranium mines revealed
60 ACS: Plutonium Oxidation and Subsequent Reduction by Mn(IV) Minerals
61 NEWS.com.au: The sensible energy alternative is within our grasp -
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
62 MSNBC: DOE eyes new Duke City facility for nuke agency -
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Former CIA Analyst: Iran Strike fet For June or July
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:14:10 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Prison Planet - June 1, 2006
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/010606iranstrike.htm
Former CIA Analyst Says Iran Strike Set For June Or July
McGovern: Staged terror attacks across Europe,
US "probable" in order to justify invasion
by Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Former CIA analyst and Presidential advisor Ray McGovern, fresh from his
heated public confrontation with Donald Rumsfeld, fears that staged terror
attacks across Europe and the US are probable in order to justify the Bush
administration's plan to launch a military strike against Iran, which he
thinks will take place in June or July.
Appearing on The Alex Jones Show, McGovern was asked about the timetable for
war in Iran and said that behind the diplomatic smokescreen, the final chess
pieces were being moved into position.
"There is already one carrier task force there in the Gulf, two are steaming
toward it at the last report I have at least - they will all be there in
another week or so."
"The propaganda has been laid, the aircraft carriers are in place, it
doesn't take much to fly the bombers out of British and US bases - cruse
missiles are at the ready, Israel is egging us on," said McGovern.
McGovern said Iran's likely response to a US air strike would be threefold -
mobilizing worldwide terrorist cells that would make Al-Qaeda look like a
girls netball team - utilizing its cruise missile arsenal to attack US ships
and sending fighters into Iraq to attack US forces.
"The Iranians can easily send three divisions of revolutionary guard troops
right over....the long border with Iraq," said McGovern, stating that the
local Sunni population of Iraq would welcome such an invasion.
The turmoil caused by such an action would lead the US to tap its so-called
'mini-nuke' arsenal said McGovern, opening a new Pandora's box of chaos.
McGovern highlighted President Bush's all time record low approval ratings
as a reason for launching an attack on Iran to again whip up false patriotic
fervour.
"I can see Karl Rove saying, 'look what you need to do is become a war
president again, get us involved with something pretty big here and then
strut around and say you can't vote for a bunch of Democrats to pull the rug
out from under me while there's a war going on'." McGovern drew a comparison
with the concillatory cold war stance of Russia and JFK's decision to
respond in a similar manner, and the Iranian President's letter which was
immediately dismissed by the Bush administration. JFK's approach saved the
US from potential nuclear anihalation while Bush's actions put the US in
severe danger as Russia and China give ominous mixed signals on what their
response to a US strike on Iran will be.
McGovern lambasted Bush's inner circle as uniformly lacking any real
military experience and characterized them as a cabal already hell-bent on
war.
McGovern entertained the notion that western governments and intelligence
hierarchies could potentially stage terror attacks in Europe and the US
either before or after an invasion of Iran.
"That's altogether possible," said McGovern.
"I would say even probable because they need some proximate cause, some
casus belli to justify really unleashing things on Iran....I would put very
little past this crew - their record of dissembling and disingenuousness is
unparalleled."
McGovern said that Rove, Cheney and Rumsfeld, fearing impeachment and
Enron-style criminal proceedings, are urging President Bush to launch a war
in order to create a climate unconducive to lengthy investigations and
impeachment proceedings.
Asked to cite specifically when we should expect to see an attack launched,
McGovern said, "I think we all agree that an attack is likely before the
election and we all agree that it has to do largely with the election - as
for timing I see a likelihood that it could come as early as late June or
early July, most of my colleagues predict August, September, maybe an
October surprise even."
"My thinking is that for it to be October that would be so crass and so
transparent that even this crowd would shy away from making it so obvious,"
said McGovern.
McGovern is set to appear along with a host of other respected and credible
whistleblowers at the American Scholars Symposium at the end of this month.
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 IPS-English GULF-IRAN: GCC urges Iran to cooperate with IAEA
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 14:23:09 -0700
GULF-IRAN: GCC urges Iran to cooperate with IAEA
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)
RIYADH, June 5 (WAM) - The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) called for
settling Iran's nuclear crisis through diplomatic means and urged Tehran
to show full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA).
"We are deeply concerned about the possibility of environmental and human
catastrophes and damages caused by the Iranian reactors in Bushehr due to
its geographical proximity to GCC countries," said a statement issued
Saturday night at the end of the 99th session of the GCC foreign ministers
held here under the chairmanship of United Arab Emirates (UAE) Foreign
Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
The statement reiterated the GCC's support for efforts being exerted to
clear the Middle East, including the Gulf region, from weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) without exempting Israel.
"Israel should not be excluded from this effort," the statement
emphasised.
The ministers praised achievements made by their group in efforts to
combat terrorism and welcomed admission of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain to
membership of the UN Human Rights Council. It lauded coordinated efforts
and measures taken by countries which experienced terror attacks to combat
and fend off these acts.
On the GCC's relations with other international groupings, the
statement expressed satisfaction at the positive results generated from
talks with the European Union and expressed the hope that an agreement
would be concluded as soon as possible.
The foreign ministers of the six-nation bloc reviewed what had been
achieved in all fields since the previous session and discussed latest
regional and international political developments.
The statement also dealt with a host of issues including Iraq,
Palestine and Lebanon. (WAM)
(WAM)
*****************************************************************
3 Guardian Unlimited: Envoy to Show Iranians Anti-Uranium Deal
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 5, 2006 4:31 PM
AP Photo BRU102
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iranian officials have agreed to meet
Tuesday with a senior EU representative carrying a six-nation
package of rewards and penalties meant to stop Tehran's uranium
enrichment program, diplomats said.
Chief European Union foreign policy official Javier Solana had
been expected to present the proposal to Iranian officials
sometime this week. The diplomats, who spoke on condition of
anonymity because the timetable was confidential, said Monday
that Solana would submit the package to Foreign Minister
Manouchehr Mottaki.
The package put together by the United States, Russia, China,
Britain, France and Germany offers economic and political
incentives if Tehran relinquishes domestic enrichment, which can
generate power as well as make weapons-grade uranium for
warheads. The offer also contains the threat of U.N. sanctions
if Iran remains defiant.
Asked whether the United States was optimistic that Iran would
accept the offer, White House press secretary Tony Snow said
Monday: ``There's neither optimism, nor pessimism. There's
hope.''
In a breakthrough last week, the United States agreed to join in
multi-nation talks on the package if Tehran suspends enrichment.
Diplomats said Monday that Washington has sweetened the offer
originally drawn up by France, Britain and Germany by saying it
will lift some bilateral sanctions on Tehran such as a ban on
Boeing passenger aircraft and related parts if Iran agrees to an
enrichment freeze.
Iranian officials have sent conflicting signals on the
six-nation initiative, reflecting a possible struggle within the
leadership on how to react.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is normally a hardline
critic of the United States who insists that Tehran has a right
to enrichment. But he said over the weekend that a breakthrough
in negotiations was possible and welcomed the U.S. offer to join
talks, while rejecting preconditions.
However, Iran's top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, insisting on
Sunday that Tehran will not give up its right to produce nuclear
fuel. Khamenei warned energy shipments from the Gulf region
would be disrupted should Iran come under attack from the U.S.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran has weeks to settle nuclear dispute, says Rice
Associated Press in Washington
Monday June 5, 2006
The Guardian
The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, yesterday warned
that the incentives offered by the west to Iran to end its
nuclear programme were not open-ended, but declined to say
whether Tehran had a firm deadline to respond.
"I'm not one for timelines, but we do have to have this settled
over a matter of weeks, not months," she said. The US, Britain,
Germany, France, China and Russia agreed last Thursday to offer
Iran incentives to give up uranium enrichment, and to punish it
if it refused. "No one among these six powers is prepared to let
this drag out," she said.
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
5 IRNA: Diplomat: Iranians intent on regaining their legitimate rights -
Beijing, June 5, IRNA
Iran-China-Assadi
The Iranian people and officials will not stop efforts to make
progress and gain their legitimate rights based on the
international regulations, Iran's Charge D'affaires to China
Farhad Assadi said on Monday.
Addressing ceremonies, marking the 17th demise anniversary of
the father of Islamic Revolution and founder of the Islamic
Republic the late Imam Khomeini here on Monday, Assadi defended
Iran's peaceful nuclear program, adding, "Iran has times and
again announced that its peaceful nuclear research is not
weapon-grade."
Assadi said Iran is in dire need of new and diversified energy
resources, including nuclear energy, regarding the fact that
fossil fuels would finish in the next few decades.
He said Iran uses peaceful nuclear energy for generation of
electricity.
"Any NPT member is entitled to use nuclear energy for civilian
purposes and Iran is moving in the line; the senior Iranian
officials have repeatedly stressed that the country's nuclear
program is peaceful."
He said certain Western states, especially the Zionist regime,
have in the past few years been in efforts to impede progress of
Iran's peaceful nuclear program, but the Iranian officials and
nation have under the wise leadership of the Supreme Leader went
on their way and the enrichment research thus started.
Somewhere in his remarks, Assadi said Iran is mulling the
package of incentives offered by the P5+1 Group.
*****************************************************************
6 IRNA: Rafsanjani dismisses enemies' show of publicity against Iran -
Tehran, June 5, IRNA
Iran-Nuclear-Rafsanjani
Iran's former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani on Sunday
dismissed the enemies' show of publicity on Iran's peaceful
nuclear program, saying Tehran has always been acting on the
international norms and rules.
"We proved during the Sacred Defense (the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq
war) that will do nothing in defiance of the international
regulations," said Rafsanjani in an address to a group of people
and officials attending ceremonies, marking the 17th demise
anniversary of the father of Islamic Revolution and founder of
the Islamic Republic the late Imam Khomeini.
The Expediency Council Chairman said during the eight-year
Sacred Defense, nothing -- the all-out attack of the Iraqi armed
forces on Iranian passenger planes and on the residential areas
in cities and villages as well as extensive application of
chemical weapons -- diverted Iran from the path of justice.
Iran's top arbitrator said, "Our system is a moral and cultural
one and Americans and their mercenaries know this quite well."
1420/1420
*****************************************************************
7 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI has been acting on int'l norms
2006/06/05
Tehran, June 5 - Head of the Expediency Council, Akbar Hashemi
Rafsanjani on Sunday dismissed the enemies' show of publicity on
Iran's peaceful nuclear program, saying Tehran has always been
acting on the international norms and rules.
"We proved during the Sacred Defense (the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war)
that will do nothing in defiance of the international
regulations," said Rafsanjani in an address to a group of people
and officials attending ceremonies, marking the 17th demise
anniversary of the father of Islamic Revolution and founder of
the Islamic Republic the late Imam Khomeini.
The Expediency Council Chairman said during the eight-year
Sacred Defense, nothing -- the all-out attack of the Iraqi armed
forces on Iranian passenger planes and on the residential areas
in cities and villages as well as extensive application of
chemical weapons -- diverted Iran from the path of justice.
Iran's top arbitrator said, "Our system is a moral and cultural
one and Americans and their mercenaries know this quite well."
Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center.
*****************************************************************
8 AFP: EU's Solana due in Tehran to submit nuclear proposal
by Siavosh Ghazi Mon Jun 5, 7:54 AM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - European Union " /> European Unionforeign policy
chief Javier Solana was expected in Tehran to submit an
international nuclear proposal to Iran " /> Iran's leadership,
official and diplomatic sources said.
The package, agreed on last week by the five permanent members
of the UN Security Council plus Germany, offers Iran incentives
and fresh multilateral talks -- involving the United States -- on
the condition that Iran first suspend uranium enrichment.
"Mr Solana will arrive in Tehran tonight," a source close to the
visit said. Official sources indicated he was likely to hand the
proposal to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday.
"Very, very soon I will be going to Tehran," Solana said at a
press conference in the West Bank " /> West Banktown of Ramallah.
Iran's uranium enrichment programme is at the centre of fears the
country could make nuclear weapons.
Iran has so far refused to suspend enrichment, arguing such fuel
cycle work is for peaceful purposes only and is therefore a
right enshrined by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
But the Islamic republic's hardline leadership has nevertheless
agreed to study the offer of trade, security and technology
benefits. The offer from the six world powers is accompanied by
a threat of robust UN Security Council action -- including
possible sanctions -- if Iran fails to halt enrichment.
When asked to give details of the offer, Solana said: "I cannot
answer this. I have said very clearly at the last meeting on
Friday that this is something that we have to present to the
Iranian people and government."
But diplomats told AFP that the United States has moved to
sweeten the offer to Iran by offering to lift some of its trade
sanctions.
The United States is proposing "lifting sanctions partially, not
only waiving sanctions but actually lifting them," in an
agreement to be worked out in multilateral talks that would
start once Iran suspended uranium enrichment, a senior Western
diplomat said in Vienna.
Washington, which considers Iran a sponsor of terrorism and now
fears it is covertly developing nuclear weapons, has since the
mid-1990s banned most US trade and investment with the Islamic
republic.
Lifting sanctions would allow sales to Iran of things like
agricultural technology and commercial planes to replace the
country's dilapidated fleet.
US officials have said they want to keep the details of the
proposal secret in order to avoid the appearance of threatening
Iran.
But a string of tough comments from Iranian officials have
signalled that the offer could prove to be dead of arrival.
On Saturday, hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad revealed
that in a telephone conversation earlier Saturday with UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan
" /> Kofi Annan, he had been asked "to examine the proposals and
not act hastily."
"I said that we will not act hastily and that we will examine
the proposals," Ahmadinejad said.
But the president has also ruled out halting enrichment, saying
that "negotiating our absolute right would be like accepting to
negotiate on our independence."
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Sunday that
his country would not buckle in the face of "threats and
bribes".
"We have achieved a lot of scientific goals," Khamenei said in a
speech marking the 17th anniversary of the death of Iran's
Islamic revolutionary leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
"This is an historic investment. It represents our political
independence and national self confidence. We should not sell
out this precious resource because of the enemies' threats and
we should not be fooled by enemy bribes," he said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
9 AFP: EU's Solana in Iran to present nuclear proposal
by Siavosh Ghazi Mon Jun 5, 4:33 PM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - European Union " /> European Unionforeign policy
chief Javier Solana flew into Tehran to hand an international
nuclear proposal to Iran " /> Iran's leadership, voicing hope of
a "new relationship" with the Islamic republic.
The package, agreed on last week by the five permanent members
of the UN Security Council plus Germany, offers Iran incentives
and fresh multilateral talks -- involving the United States -- on
condition that Tehran first suspends sensitive uranium enrichment
work.
That work is at the centre of fears the country could acquire
weapons.
"We want to start a new relationship on the basis of mutual
respect and mutual trust," Solana said in brief comments to
reporters after flying in from a visit to Israel " /> Israeland
the West Bank " /> West Bank.
"We want to restart a fresh relationship and we want to do it
based on what I said before, based on a spirit of trust and
respect and confidence. The proposal we bring along will allow us
to get engaged in negotiations based on trust, confidence and
respect," he said.
Western officials have said Iran will be expected to give its
response within a matter of weeks. If Tehran refuses to return to
an enrichment freeze, it faces the threat of tough UN Security
Council action, including possible sanctions.
Diplomats said Solana would submit the proposal to Iran's top
national security official Ali Larijani on Tuesday morning, but
without negotiations. He may also meet with hardline President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Iran has refused to stop what it maintains is a peaceful nuclear
programme, but has promised that it will at least consider the
proposal.
"If their aim is not to politicise the issue and if they take our
demands into consideration, we can reach a reasonable agreement,"
Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told reporters earlier
at Tehran airport.
"We will examine this proposal and give our reply after the end
of the defined period," he added.
In Washington, the White House said "there is hope" that Tehran
will accept the internationally brokered compromise.
"I would counsel patience," spokesman Tony Snow told reporters.
"At this point, as we've said all along, let's give it time.
Let's let the Iranians take a look at what the offers are, at the
incentives and disincentives."
The United States charges that Iran is using its nuclear program
to hide a quest for atomic weapons, but has also offered to join
direct talks with Tehran and -- according to diplomats -- lift
certain sanctions if Iran agrees to a freeze.
Washington, whose ties with Tehran were severed more than two
decades ago, has since the mid-1990s banned most US trade and
investment in the Islamic republic.
"The condition for getting to the negotiating table is to suspend
enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. That's the first
step. Should that happen, then the whole series of other things
can take place," Snow said.
"There's neither optimism nor pessimism; there is hope" that
Iranian leaders will accept, he said.
But a string of tough comments from Iranian officials have left
many diplomats fearing that the offer could prove to be dead on
arrival.
On Saturday, Ahmadinejad revealed that in a telephone
conversation earlier Saturday with UN Secretary General Kofi
Annan " /> Kofi Annanhe had been asked "to examine the proposals
and not act hastily". But the president has also ruled out
halting enrichment, saying that "negotiating our absolute right
would be like accepting to negotiate on our independence." Iran's
supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Sunday that his
country would not buckle in the face of "threats and bribes". "We
have achieved a lot of scientific goals," Khamenei said in a
speech marking the 17th anniversary of the death of Iran's
Islamic revolutionary leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. "This
is an historic investment.
It represents our political independence and national
self-confidence. We should not sell out this precious resource
because of the enemies' threats and we should not be fooled by
enemy bribes," he said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
10 AFP: US sweetens offer to Iran: diplomats
by Michael Adler Mon Jun 5, 1:18 PM ET
VIENNA (AFP) - The United States has offered to lift some of its
trade sanctions against Iran " /> Iranas part of a package of
benefits the EU will deliver to get Tehran to guarantee it will
not make nuclear weapons, diplomats told AFP.
The United States is proposing "lifting sanctions partially, not
only waiving sanctions but actually lifting them," in an
agreement to be worked out in multilateral talks that would start
once Iran suspended uranium enrichment, said a senior Western
diplomat, who requested anonymity.
Washington, which considers Iran a sponsor of terrorism and now
fears it is covertly developing nuclear weapons, has since the
mid-1990's banned most US trade and investment with the Islamic
Republic.
Lifting sanctions would allow sales to Iran of things like
agricultural technology and commercial planes to replace the
country's dilapidated fleet.
US officials have said they want to keep the details of the
proposal secret in order to avoid the appearance of threatening
Iran.
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Sunday that his
country, which claims its nuclear work is part of a peaceful
program to generate electricity, would not buckle in the face of
"threats and bribes".
"You threaten Iran. You say you want to direct energy in the
region. If you make a single mistake about Iran, the supply of
energy will definitely be put in serious risk," Khamenei said of
the United States.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
" /> Condoleezza Riceswiftly brushed off the warning.
"I think we shouldn't place too much emphasis on a threat of
this kind," she told Fox News.
"I think something like 80 percent of Iran's budget comes from
oil revenue, and so obviously it would be a very serious problem
for Iran if oil were disrupted on the market."
The incentives offer from six world powers, which European Union
" /> European Unionforeign policy chief Javier Solana is to
present in the coming days in Tehran, is accompanied by a threat
of UN Security Council penalties if Iran fails to halt
enrichment, which makes nuclear reactor fuel but also atom bomb
material.
On the benefits side, which encompasses trade, security and
technology benefits, the United States "is not only interested
in allowing Europe to sell Airbus airplanes to Tehran but also
supplying (US-made) Boeings," the diplomat said.
And trade in agricultural fields, "where the United States is
particularly competitive ... is important for Iran since Iran is
still a rural country in lots of ways," the diplomat added.
A second Vienna-based diplomat said sanctions would be lifted
also to allow the sale of "dual-use technology which has
peaceful but also military applications."
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Saturday that
Solana was expected in Tehran to submit the proposal from the
five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- Britain,
China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus Germany for
fresh multilateral talks.
The first diplomat said that during talks in Vienna Thursday on
a draft of the package that had been drawn up by EU negotiators
Britain, Germany and France, "the Americans added something to
the offer. The Americans beefed up the offer of benefits, which
was a surprise."
The draft proposal, which was seen by AFP before the final
revisions, promises to "actively support ... Iran's civil
nuclear plan, including the building of light water reactors in
Iran through joint projects."
The draft text also proposes "legally binding ... assurances"
including letting Tehran be "partner in an international fuel
cycle centre in Russia" to enrich uranium.
It also said a nuclear fuel reserve would be set up to guarantee
Iran supplies.
The first diplomat confirmed that this offer was still in the
text as "they did not water down the offer in the nuclear
fields."
In comments confirmed by other envoys, the diplomat said: "I
don't think there were major amendments" to the draft, beyond
the additions by the United States to make the benefits more
attractive.
The diplomat said that a list of limited, targeted sanctions,
such as a travel ban on Iranians involved in the nuclear
program, and pegged as "possible measures in the event that Iran
does not cooperate," was still in the proposal.
Iranian allies Russia and China "approved the sanctions paper,
meaning they are not going to veto such a thing in the Security
Council," where new resolutions would be required to levy such
penalties, the diplomat said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
11 AFP: Hopeful US urges patience on Iran
Mon Jun 5, 4:38 PM ET
WASHINGTON(AFP) - The White House pleaded for patience with
overtures to Iran " /> , saying "there is hope" that Tehran will
accept an internationally brokered compromise on its nuclear
programs.
"I would counsel patience," spokesman Tony Snow told reporters.
"At this point, as we've said all along, let's give it time.
Let's let the Iranians take a look at what the offers are, at the
incentives and disincentives."
The United States charges that Iran is using its nuclear program
to hide a quest for atomic weapons. Tehran denies the accusation.
Snow said that the package crafted by the United States, Russia,
China, Britain, France and Germany has yet to be formally
presented to Tehran, and he again discounted early Iranian
rejections of a call to freeze sensitive nuclear activities.
With European Union
" /> foreign policy chief Javier Solana due to present the offer
in Tehran, Snow said "there's neither optimism nor pessimism;
there is hope" that Iranian leaders will accept.
"The condition for getting to the negotiating table is to
suspend enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. That's
the first step. Should that happen, then the whole series of
other things can take place," he said.
"What's going to happen is that the Iranians are going to have
to determine for themselves how seriously they want to take the
proposition from the EU-3 (Britain, France and Germany) and the
United States," he said.
"And I think that sometimes goes through several iterations
before we get a final answer. So we're not quite ready to give
the final answer," said Snow.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
12 Boston Globe: Bar group will review Bush's legal challenges -
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | June 4, 2006
WASHINGTON -- The board of governors of the American Bar
Association voted unanimously yesterday to investigate whether
President Bush has exceeded his constitutional authority in
reserving the right to ignore more than 750 laws that have been
enacted since he took office.
Meeting in New Orleans, the board of governors for the world's
largest association of legal professionals approved the creation
of an all-star legal panel with a number of members from both
political parties.
They include a former federal appeals court chief judge, a
former FBI director, and several prominent scholars -- to
evaluate Bush's assertions that he has the power to ignore laws
that conflict with his interpretation of the Constitution.
Bush has appended statements to new laws when he signs them,
noting which provisions he believes interfere with his powers.
Among the laws Bush has challenged are the ban on torturing
detainees, oversight provisions in the USA Patriot Act, and
``whistle-blower" protections for federal employees.
The challenges also have included safeguards against political
interference in taxpayer-funded research.
Bush has challenged more laws than all previous presidents
combined.
The ABA's president, Michael Greco, said in an interview that he
proposed the task force because he believes the scope and
aggressiveness of Bush's signing statements may raise serious
constitutional concerns. He said the ABA, which has more than
400,000 members, has a duty to speak out about such legal issues
to the public, the courts, and Congress.
``The American Bar Association feels a very serious obligation
to ensure that when there are legal issues that affect the
American people, the ABA adopts a policy regarding such issues
and then speaks out about it," Greco said. ``In this instance,
the president's practice of attaching signing statements to laws
squarely presents a constitutional issue about the separation of
powers among the three branches."
The signing statements task force, which was recruited by Greco,
a longtime Boston lawyer who served on former Governor William
F. Weld's Judicial Nominating Council, includes several
Republicans. Among them are Mickey Edwards , a former Oklahoma
representative from 1977 to 1993, and Bruce Fein , a Justice
Department official under President Reagan.
In interviews, several of the panel members said they were going
into the project with an open mind, but they expressed concerns
about Bush's actions.
``I think one of the most critical issues in the country right
now is the extent to which the White House has tried to expand
its powers and basically tried to cut the legislative branch out
of its own constitutionally equal role, and the signing
statements are a particularly egregious example of that,"
Edwards said. ``I've been doing a lot of speaking and writing
about this, and when the ABA said they were looking to take a
position on signing statements, I said that's serious because
those people carry a lot of weight."
William Sessions , a retired federal judge who was the director
of the FBI under both Reagan and President George H.W. Bush ,
said he agreed to participate because he believed that the
signing statements raise a ``serious problem" for the American
constitutional system.
``I think it's very important for the people of the United
States to have trust and reliance that the president is not
going around the law," Sessions said. ``The importance of it
speaks for itself."
Another member, Patricia Wald, is a retired chief judge of the
US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, appointed by
President Carter.
She said she had monitored the use of signing statements by
previous administrations, but ``the accelerated use in recent
years presents a real question about separation of powers and
checks and balances."
Wald also said she was especially interested in studying how
signing statements affect the federal bureaucracy. As a judge,
Wald said, she dealt with many cases involving challenges to
decisions made by administrative agencies. She said that courts
are deferential to such decisions because they are supposed to
be made by objective specialists in the agencies. But a heavy
use of signing statements could call that assumption into
question.
``If Congress passes a law telling the people in the bureaucracy
that `this is what you should do,' and the president signs it
but attaches a statement saying `I don't want you to do it,' how
is that going to affect the motivation of the bureaucracy?" she
said.
The task force also includes several prominent legal scholars,
such as Harold Koh , dean of Yale Law School and a former
official in the Reagan and Clinton administrations; Kathleen
Sullivan , former dean of Stanford Law School; Charles Ogletree
, a Harvard law professor; and Stephen Saltzburg , a professor
at George Washington University Law School.
Saltzburg -- who was a Justice Department official under Reagan
and the first president Bush, as well as a prosecutor in the
Iran-Contra scandal -- said he did not believe that signing
statements were unconstitutional.
But, he said, frequent use of them could create bad perceptions
about whether the US government obeys the rule of law.
``The president can say anything he wants when he signs a bill,"
Saltzburg said. ``[But] what does it say about respect for the
Constitution and for the notion of checks and balances to have
the president repeatedly claim the authority not to obey
statutes, which he is signing into law?"
Rounding out the panel are Mark Agrast , a former legislative
counsel for Representative William D. Delahunt , Democrat of
Quincy, and Thomas Susman, who worked in the Justice
Department's Office of Legal Counsel under both Presidents
Johnson and Nixon , and was later counsel to the Senate
Judiciary Committee.
Susman said he agreed to serve out of intellectual curiosity:
``I think it's a fascinating subject," he said. The task force
is chaired by Neal Sonnett , a former federal prosecutor.
Earlier this year, Sonnett chaired a similar ABA panel of
bipartisan specialists who studied the legality of Bush's
warrantless spying program.
The earlier panel unanimously concluded that Bush should obey a
law requiring warrants for such surveillance, or he should ask
Congress to change the law, rather than simply ignoring it.
In February, the ABA House of Delegates voted overwhelmingly to
endorse the surveillance task force's recommendations, enabling
Greco to testify about the program before Congress.
Sonnett said he planned to run the task force in a similar
fashion. The group will discuss the issues in telephone
conference calls. They will also divide up issues to research
for the report that will accompany any of their recommendations,
circulating drafts until they reach a consensus.
The task force will make its recommendation this summer, Greco
said, and the 550-member ABA House of Delegates will vote on
whether to adopt its findings at a meeting in August.
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter,
Republican of Pennsylvania, promised to hold a hearing on Bush's
use of signing statements.
Specter pledged the action after an article in The Boston Globe
described the scope and details of Bush's assertions concerning
the laws in them.
Greco and Sonnett also said the Globe's coverage of signing
statements had persuaded them to launch the task force .[ /]
© Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.
*****************************************************************
13 The Australian: MP rejects nuclear plant | |
This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP
By Nikki Todd June 05, 2006
RESIDENTS of the mining city of Mt Isa in north-west Queensland
should not be used as guinea pigs for any nuclear power plant,
local MP Tony McGrady said today.
Mt Isa has been identified in a 1997 Cabinet submission as a
possible site for a nuclear reactor along with 13 other
locations in Australia.
Toowoomba, west of Brisbane, has also been raised as a possible
site for a nuclear power plant, with federal Resources Minister
Ian Macfarlane, who represents the Toowoomba seat of Groom,
saying he was open to the idea.
Prime Minister John Howard has raised the prospect of nuclear
power in Australia, and is expected to call for an expert review
of the energy source at federal Cabinet this week.
But he said it was premature to be talking about identifying
possible sites for a nuclear reactor at this stage.
Queensland Speaker Mr McGrady, a former mines minister who
represents the seat of Mt Isa, said such such a plant would not
be welcome in his electorate.
"It is all very well for Mr Howard and his advisers to be
sitting on the back porch of Kirribilli House on the north shore
saying we will have a nuclear reactor in Mt Isa," Mr McGrady
said.
"But quite honestly I don't believe the people I represent will
be in favour of it.
"The jury is still out on the safety of nuclear reactors and I
don't want my people to be seen as guinea pigs."
Mr McGrady said he did not want a nuclear dump in the area
either. However, Mr McGrady said his support for uranium mining
was still strong and did not contradict his rejection of a
nuclear power plant or dump.
"We have products here and if people want it they can buy it,"
he said.
"If they don't buy it from us, they will buy it from South
Australia or Canada or somewhere else."
Premier Peter Beattie said he did not want any nuclear power
plant or nuclear dump in Queensland.
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
14 SABCnews.com: Pebble reactors could be answer to energy needs
South African Broadcasting Corporation Copyright © 2000 - 2005 SABC
[Alec Erwin, the public enterprises minister]
The government says the PBMR could be the answer to the
increasing demand for energy
June 05, 2006, 15:15
The government says the Pebble Bed Modular Reactors (PBMR) could
be the answer to the increasing demand for energy, in line with
increasing economic growth.
Speaking on his budget vote in Parliament, Alec Erwin, the
public enterprises minister, said the past few years have shown
that South Africa is capable of even higher economic growth and
that reliable energy supply is needed. He says nuclear energy is
emerging as an attractive alternative.
"PBMR provides cost effective alternative solutions ... it can
be close to the point of use, so there's no need to upgrade
either transmission or rail infrastructure. PBMR use uranium in
small quantities, with resulting advantages in wastage
management. In addition, South Africa has an abundance of
uranium, negating security of supply concerns," said Erwin.
*****************************************************************
15 The Australian: Bishop dismisses nuke site call
This story is from our network Source: AAP
June 06, 2006
SCIENCE Minister Julie Bishop has rejected Labor's push to
include reactor locations in a federal inquiry into nuclear
power, saying debate about sites is premature.
Federal Cabinet will take the first major step towards an
Australian nuclear industry today when it signs off on an
inquiry into the controversial energy source.
Prime Minister John Howard will take a proposal to Cabinet for
a wide-ranging investigation by a panel of experts, but he has
refused to say where he thinks any potential reactors should be
located.
A scientific review has said at least three and possibly five
plants would be required, and the Opposition says potential
sites must be part of the inquiry's terms of reference.
But Ms Bishop today said she was not aware of any list of
potential sites, and it was too early consider where reactors
would be built.
"First things first. What we have to look at is whether or not
it's a viable alternative," she said on Channel 9.
"There is considerable international experience. Australia is
one of the few, perhaps the only mature market economy that
doesn't have any nuclear capacity.
"There are over 440 nuclear power stations around the world and
we should see if it's viable for Australia."
The process for finding nuclear reactor sites would be no
different from investigating locations for any power station.
"In terms of a site, if you were going to build any form of
power station, a coal-fired power station for example, many many
places would be ruled out because you need the appropriate
environment, land mass and the like," Ms Bishop said.
"So the consideration of any site for any power station would
be a separate exercise."
© The Australian
*****************************************************************
16 The Australian: Coal hits back at nuclear power
NEWS.com.au
Andrew Fraser and Rick Wallace June 06, 2006
THE coal industry believes power stations that do not produce
greenhouse gases could be operating across Australia in the same
time it takes to establish nuclear power stations.
Fighting back against the push towards nuclear power, the
industry claims the rapidly developing methods of making coal
cleaner and more valuable would make nuclear power plants
obsolete.
Federal cabinet is today expected to approve an inquiry into
nuclear energy after John Howard said nuclear power in Australia
was "inevitable".
Australian Coal Association executive director Mark O'Neill said
last night that the potential of clean coal technology and the
investments of key stakeholders could not be overlooked.
Work will begin later this year in the US on the world's first
zero-emissions coal-fired plant, which will be running by 2012,
and Mr O'Neill said Australia's involvement in the project meant
zero-emission plants could be operating in Australia within a
decade.
"Between 2012 and 2020 the cost of this reduced and
zero-emission technology will come down," Mr O'Neill said. "The
technologies will be competitive with the alternatives."
Clean-coal technology involves removing carbon dioxide from the
emissions of coal-fired power stations and burying it in the
ground.
Two Australian scientists are working closely on the US project
- Peter Cook, the chief executive of the Co-operative Research
Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies, and Kelly Thambimuthu,
chief executive of the Centre for Low Emission Technology - and
examining how the technology may help the coal industry here.
With Queensland relying more on coal revenues, which will partly
underpin today's budget, state power generator CSEnergy has also
been undertaking a project to use oxygen to enable easier
separation of carbon dioxide.
While the federal Government is putting $500 million into
research, the coal industry has also put up $300 million and the
Queensland Government a further $300 million through the sale of
its two energy retailers, Ergon and Energex.
Victoria has pumped $106 million into clean-coal technology,
with much of it going into a scheme to foster private-sector
research into reducing emissions from coal plants.
Through the Energy Technology Innovation Strategy, the state
Government is examining geosequesteration (storing carbon
dioxide emissions in underground wells) and gasification
(transforming coal to react with oxygen without burning) to
reduce emissions from the coal-fired plants in Victoria's
Latrobe Valley, which generate most of the state's power.
A spokesman for state Energy Minister Theo Theophanous said
Victoria was putting money into clean coal technology because
nuclear power "doesn't stack up on environmental grounds, it
doesn't stack up on economic grounds and doesn't have the
acceptance of the community".
He said a Victorian study more than a year ago found it cost
twice as much money to produce electricity through nuclear
power.
Queensland Premier Peter Beattie warned yesterday that a nuclear
industry would undermine Australia's coal industry, particularly
in NSW and his home state, where there is a 300-year supply of
coal and 16,000 workers in the industry.
Mr Beattie said buyers in some world markets were already making
a choice between nuclear energy and coal, and the growth of a
nuclear industry would inhibit the coal industry.
"I don't understand why people undermine the coal industry,"
said Mr Beattie.
"We're going down the road of clean coal technology and we've
got 300 years supply of coal."
Mr Beattie said the federal Government had seriously misread the
electoral mood and there was little public support for nuclear
reactors or a nuclear waste dump.
"Coal royalties fund a large part of our police, nurses,
doctors, paramedics, school teachers. And why would you give
that up," Mr Beattie said.
"In many ways, it is the backbone of the Queensland economy.
"The Prime Minister is, quite frankly, wrong on this. While I'm
Premier we will do everything we can to block a nuclear
reactor."
NSW Premier Morris Iemma declared his Government would block any
nuclear power plants planned for the state.
West Australian Premier Alan Carpenter went a step further,
threatening to mount a High Court challenge against any move by
the commonwealth to enforce uranium mining, reprocessing or
nuclear energy on the state.
Mr Carpenter attacked the integrity of the Howard Government's
inquiry, saying its suggested members had "a predisposition in
favour of nuclear energy". He said Australia's chief scientist,
Jim Peacock, was a strong supporter of nuclear power, and that
Macquarie Bank executive Paul McClintock had a vested interest
in promoting infrastructure projects.
Rio Tinto mining executive Andy Lloyd said it was in the
interests of the coal industry to reduce greenhouse gases.
"The coal industry has put $300million into research and it
doesn't put its hand in its pocket to that extent unless it
really means it," Mr Lloyd said.
Reserve Bank director Warwick McKibbin warned that the federal
inquiry would be a "lost opportunity" if it failed to compare
the economics of nuclear power with other energy sources.
He said yesterday he supported a study into the feasibility of
nuclear power. But its true cost in Australia could be
determined only by considering it "within the broader debate on
energy, climate and environment".
His comments came as the Australian Nuclear Science and
Technology Organisation warned that nuclear power could not
proceed unless the Government was willing to meet the costs of
cleaning up nuclear waste and to guarantee against accidents.
Chief operating officer Ron Cameron said industry was unlikely
to invest in nuclear power stations without such a government
guarantee.
"The key issue is borrowing money in the market. The market is
going to say, 'What is the risk here?' and so the Government is
going to have to insure the risk," Dr Cameron said.
The organisation believes Australia must build as many as five
power stations if the sector is to be viable. Executive director
Ian Smith said the initial costs of establishing a nuclear power
industry were so great they were likely to prove prohibitive
unless shared between a number of separate plants.
Additional reporting: Amanda Hodge, Ean Higgins, Dan Box
© The Australian
*****************************************************************
17 AU The Age: Nuclear power inquiry in hands of guarded supporter -
www.theage.com.au
Sarah Smiles, Canberra
June 6, 2006
THE man who will co-ordinate the Federal Government's inquiry
into nuclear power, Jim Peacock, is a cautious supporter of
nuclear energy.
As Australia's chief scientist, he has been pushing for a debate
in academic and government circles.
Last year he wrote to Prime Minister John Howard urging a
debate. He also organised an informal forum on nuclear power
among fellows of the Australian Academy of Science.
Dr Peacock developed a close relationship with Mr Howard while
sitting on his Science, Engineering and Innovation Council for
four years.
In February Mr Howard appointed Dr Peacock as his chief science
adviser.
"He's created a situation where the Prime Minister respects
him," said Bob Frater, vice-president of the Australian Academy
of Science.
Australian Conservation Foundation president Ian Lowe criticised
Dr Peacock's appointment to the inquiry.
"He's been on record speaking in favour of nuclear power, so
he's hardly objective," he said. "My concern generally about
this proposed expert group is that it looks like being so loaded
that we won't get objective factual information to inform the
debate, we'll get a case for the prosecution."
But Dr Frater, a former CSIRO colleague of Dr Peacock, insisted
that Dr Peacock had "no axe to grind" or unhealthy prejudice in
favour of nuclear power.
John White, president of the Australian Institute of Nuclear
Science and Engineering, said that having made scientific
breakthroughs in the field of genetically modified crops, Dr
Peacock was not afraid of controversial issues.
"He's open-minded about all sorts of things, so he wouldn't be
one to refuse the challenge of looking at such a subject as
nuclear power," Dr White said.
He said Dr Peacock's concern for nuclear energy had come in
response to the global concerns over climate change amid rising
oil prices.
Copyright © 2006. The Age Company Ltd. ![]()
UPI Page
1999 - 2006 News World Communications, Inc.
*****************************************************************
28 Western Herald: Environmentalists and plant officials debate on safety
license renewal
By Sara Johnson Senior Writer
June 05, 2006
The Palisades nuclear power plant, which has been in operation
for about 40 years, may be able to continue producing electricity
for another 20 years if a license renewal is approved. However,
many residents around its vicinity feel the dangers of the plant
are just too great.
Located in Covert Township, in Van Buren County, Palisades can
operate until 2011 under its current license, but the renewal
will allow it to operate until 2031.
Alice Hirt, along with some 20,000 other Michigan residents, is
leading a fight against a license renewal.
“A nuclear power plant has such a potential, in a very short
period of time, of creating devastation and agony, [and] I
cannot imagine allowing that,†said Hirt, a West Michigan
Environmental Action Council member.
Nuclear power plants are licensed for 40 years and that is what
they should run for, she added.
She cited the high-level nuclear waste stored in canisters 150
yards away from Lake Michigan as one of the reasons she's
against the license renewal.
“If they already have all this waste piled up on the shores
of Lake Michigan, why in the world would you want 20 more years
to make more waste that has no place to go?†Hirt asked.
Palisades planned to send the nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain
in Nevada, she said, but the area is not open right now as a
depository.
“On a daily basis Palisades, like all other nuclear plants,
releases into the environment small amounts of radioactivity.
That is not something that we need to put into our
environment,†Hirt said.
Palisades was recently recognized as having the most embrittled
reactor vessel in the country, according to a Nuclear
Information and Resource Service press release.
Mixed with pressurized thermal shock, embrittlement can
fracture the reactor vessel, which risks the loss of coolant.
This could create a melt down and release disastrous radiation
into the environment, according to the press release.
“The people that run the plant try to do a really good
job,†Hirt said. “I don't feel that they're culpable in
this. I'm not blaming them. We're just saying this plant should
not be re-licensed another 20 years.â€
Essentially Palisades is like the poster child for
embrittlement across the country. That's just the truth of the
matter.â€
Palisades Communications Manager Mark Savage disagreed, noting
that it surprises him that people who have never set foot in a
nuclear power plant claim to know everything about it.
“All of their statements basically have been fears and trying
to build on fear. Ours is fact and the fact is we've operated
safely for 35 years,†Savage said. “We continue to earn that
trust every day by continuing to operate safely.â€
If there is a problem with the reactor vessel or anything else,
the plant is shut down until the problem is fixed, he said.
“The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is here 24 hours a day.
They hold the keys to the door. If we don't do what our license
requires us to do, they'll take the keys away,†Savage said.
“If we don't operate safely, the NRC can shut us down.â€
The plant is also required to take air, crop and Lake Michigan
water samples every month to show that nothing harmful from the
plant goes into the environment, and the data is then sent to
the NRC and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
The communities surrounding Palisades greatly benefit, Savage
said.
From the tax dollars given back to the community, the plant
helps fund Covert Township's fire and police department, he
said, adding that Covert's roads are all paved and have traffic
lights, despite being situated in a rural location.
Savage also said Palisades gives about 44 percent of the tax
dollars they receive to Covert area schools, one of which has an
auditorium and a swimming pool - which is rare for a Class D
school.
“They can spend more on educating kids at Covert Schools and
the nearby districts around them [like] Bangor, Coloma and South
Haven,†he said.
Recent concerns about the Palisades have also been based on
Consumers Energy's sudden decision to sell the plant. According
to the NIRS press release, Consumers Energy has admitted to
having “reactor vessel embrittlement concerns", while listing
operating and nuclear risk as some of the reasons for selling
Palisades.
Savage said Consumers Energy owned both Palisades and the
Charlevoix nuclear plant Big Rock Point, which shut down in 1997
and left Consumers Energy with only Palisades.
Most utility companies, like Consumers Energy own six or seven
plants, he said.
“To be able to maintain the plant properly at a lesser cost,
Consumers decided at this time to sell the plant and actually
get out of nuclear energy altogether. It was a matter of
economics,†Savage said.
Throughout the country, 42 other nuclear power plants have been
granted renewal licenses. The plant submitted the renewal
application in March and anticipates a decision early next year
as to if the plant is re-licensed.
Savage said all of the estimated 650 Palisade's employees want
to operate safely at all times.
“When it comes to every piece of our equipment in our plant,
it's maintained properly and it's kept up to the high standards
that the NRC has set for us and we set for ourselves,†he said.
© 2006 The Western Herald
*****************************************************************
29 BBC: Osirak: Over the reactor
Last Updated: Monday, 5 June 2006
By Patrick Jackson BBC News
As part of a series marking 25 years since Israel bombed Iraq's
Osirak nuclear reactor, BBC News speaks to four of the F-16
pilots involved:
Cockpit footage
Had mission commander Col Zeev Raz's risk assessment been proven
right, one pilot would have ejected over Baghdad and another
would have been waiting out in the desert for helicopters to
rescue him in the night.
Yet the loss of two planes would have been a price worth paying
in the eyes of the pilots of the eight F-16s and their two F-15
escorts: several believed they were averting nothing less than a
new Holocaust of the Jews.
"No-one thought that all eight F-16s would return, no-one," the
retired colonel says.
"We were really amazed that all of us landed back safely without
a scratch."
Col Raz is the most vocal of the surviving pilots. For personal
security reasons, three of them - Pilots A, B and C - would only
talk to the BBC on condition of anonymity.
IRAQ'S OSIRAK REACTOR
Destroyed Israeli warplanes on 7 June 1981 before it could be
fuelled 10 Iraqi soldiers and one French researcher killed Attack
condemned by UN Security Council Factfile: How it was bombed
Witness: 'All hell broke out'
One Osirak pilot, however, became famous across the world in
2003 as Israel's first astronaut.
Col Ilan Ramon was killed a few days later when the Columbia
space shuttle disintegrated upon re-entry into the Earth's
atmosphere.
Osirak posed a formidable challenge: to fly a round trip of some
2,000km (1,200 miles) over hostile territory in new jets laden
with bombs and extra fuel tanks.
The US-made single-seat F-16s had been in service for only a
couple of years with the Americans, and had arrived in Israel
less than a year before, though the pilots had been in training
earlier in Utah.
"None of us had flown more than 100 missions in an F-16, which
is not a lot, and the whole plane was completely new, its
limitations were not completely clear, we were still learning,"
says Pilot A.
Glistening dome
Pilot B was anxious about the runway at Etzion, Israel's Sinai
Desert air base, which has since been returned to Egypt.
[Pilot A demonstrates how the planes dived for the
bombing run]
"I was very concerned whether the runway at that altitude would
be sufficient for a take-off at our weight," he recalls.
In the event, all eight F-16s got away safely along with their
escorts, rising into a clear sky just before 1600 (1300 GMT).
"After you take off, you have to pinch yourself and say 'Hey,
it's the real thing' because riding there it's basically 90
minutes of navigation with not a lot of activity and it's like
in training," says Pilot A.
Flying in unchallenged, Pilot C remembers his first glimpse of
the reactor. "It glistened with the sun shining from the low
west," he says.
This was despite the dome having been covered in mud by the
Iraqis, rattled by a small-scale Iranian air attack the previous
autumn.
Col Raz remembers the view from the cockpit as his F-16 climbed
for the bombing run: "We could look right and see Baghdad and
look left and see the reactor."
Within a minute, all eight planes had dropped their twin bombs
on Osirak. Only two failed to explode.
Once the bombs were released, Pilot C recalls, his only thought
was "jinking the AAA [anti-aircraft artillery] and getting to
low level".
With their lack of fuel ruling out dogfights, the pilots'
greatest concern was the flight home.
When they touched down at Etzion, each had at most 450kg (1,000
pounds) of fuel left.
A secret no more
Col Raz recalls relief, happiness and "some hugs" back on the
ground but the celebrations had to wait until the pilots got
back to their home base in Israel.
"Even then we didn't have much time to celebrate because we were
flown on a small cargo plane to Tel Aviv to debrief with the
generals," he says.
[Zeev Raz (photo supplied by same)]
Col Raz was angered by a security breach
"It had gone just like in planning and therefore there was not a
lot to say at the debriefing," Pilot A adds.
"The planners, the analysts, they are the real heroes of this
mission."
Pilot A is still impressed by the mission's modest cost: "a
couple of million of dollars, the cost of an Israeli Air Force
training day and very cheap for a military machine".
But Col Raz was expecting very muted celebrations, if any. "When
I landed back that night, I didn't tell my family anything about
the flight," he says.
Long afterwards, he was angered to find out that four fellow
F-16 pilots had told their wives even before the mission that
they were being sent to attack Osirak.
"It wasn't just a security breach," he says. "It was something
you shouldn't do to your family."
Gen Rafael Eitan, the Israeli chief of staff, had told the
Osirak pilots that Israel was not going to admit carrying out
the mission.
"And I was really amazed the day after to hear on the radio that
our government had announced it was our mission," Col Raz
recalls.
It is not clear how far Israel would have succeeded in denying
the mission. For one thing, the planes all bore Israeli
markings.
Col Raz does not rule out a domestic political motive for the
announcement though not, he stresses, the actual mission: Prime
Minister Menachem Begin faced a general election within weeks.
'For my grandfather'
Zeev Raz's role in the mission remained secret for nearly a
decade. Then, in 1991, when Iraqi Scud missiles were hitting
Israel during the Gulf War, he was persuaded by the government
to go public in a morale-boosting exercise.
[Israeli F-16 jets flying above norther Israel (image: Israeli
Defence Forces) ] recall feeling that even if I did not come
back, this mission would prevent another Holocaust and I was in
debt to my grandfather
Pilot C
Pilot B once relived the mission in a dream, a couple of years
afterwards, but the mission had "no special effect" on his
career.
Pilot C says life for him after Osirak was very much "business as
usual with other missions that were more exciting, including
several dogfights".
"I had my first engagement in '82, when I shot a MiG," recalls
Pilot A. "With the clashes in Lebanon, it was such a hectic time.
Osirak only became interesting again after the 1991 war with Iraq
when the issue of weapons of mass destruction came back."
Col Raz and his fellow Osirak veterans commemorate the mission
each year, describing it to younger pilots.
In July, the Osirak veterans will join other F-16 pilots at a
base in northern Israel to celebrate the 25th anniversary.
Debate will continue about how much of a real danger Iraq posed
to Israel, but all the pilots are still convinced they were
fighting a mortal threat to their country.
Both Col Raz and Pilot C are named after grandfathers who were
murdered by the Nazis, and Pilot A also had family killed by
them.
"I recall feeling that even if I did not come back, this mission
would prevent another Holocaust and I was in debt to my
grandfather," says Pilot C.
"Personally, I never connected the mission with the Holocaust,"
says Pilot A. "But I knew this was a very important mission for
Israel. It was something we could not miss, there was no second
chance.
"Later, in Lebanon, there was some conflict within Israeli
society but I don't think there was any political debate about
the legitimacy of attacking Osirak - the debate was about whether
you could stop it or slow it or whether it would get even worse
after a couple of years."
"No doubt it was the most important mission of my career," Col
Raz adds.
*****************************************************************
30 DFP: Nuclear power is no pretty picture; it comes with great risks
FROM OUR READERS:
+ Freep.com [Detroit Free Press]
Letters to the editor
June 5, 2006
Your May 28 editorial, "Back on line with nuclear" was
particularly entertaining. The image of a sunflower with a
radiation symbol in the center giving sustenance to bees draped
in an American flag brought a tear to my eye, along with a good
belly laugh.
President George W. Bush is right: America needs to take nuclear
power seriously again. Why? Because he and his Robber Baron
buddies are about to fleece the American public once again.
With regard to DTE Energy, it already has a reactor next to Fermi
II -- Fermi I -- and it had a core melt accident Oct. 5, 1966.
The product of nuclear power is nuclear waste. The electricity is
fleeting, and what the public is left with is a lethal legacy
that must be isolated from the biosphere for tens of thousands of
years.
Nuclear power? No thank you!
Michael J. Keegan
Coalition for a Nuclear Free
Great Lakes, Monroe
Copyright © 2006 Detroit Free Press Inc.
*****************************************************************
31 NRC: Peach Bottom Docket
FR Doc E6-8649
[Federal Register: June 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 107)]
[Notices] [Page 32375-32376] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05jn06-80]
No. 50-354, License No. NPF-57; Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311,
License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75]
In the Matter of PSEG Nuclear LLC; Exelon Generation Company,
LLC; (Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3);
(Hope Creek Generating Station); (Salem Nuclear Generating
Station Unit Nos. 1 and 2); Order Approving Transfers of Licenses
and Conforming Amendments I PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG Nuclear) owns
Hope Creek Generating Station (Hope Creek), a 57.41-percent
interest in Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
(Salem), and a 50-percent interest in Peach Bottom Atomic Power
Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom). Exelon Generation
Company, LLC (EGC) owns the remaining interests in Salem and
Peach Bottom. PSEG Nuclear holds the Facility Operating License,
No. NPF-57, for Hope Creek, co-holds the Facility Operating
Licenses, Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75, for Salem, and co-holds the
Renewed Facility Operating Licenses, Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56, for
Peach Bottom, and is authorized to possess, use, and, except for
Peach Bottom, operate the facilities in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the licenses. EGC is the other co-holder of the
Renewed Facility Operating Licenses for Peach Bottom, and is
authorized to possess, use and operate Peach Bottom, and is the
other co-holder of the Facility Operating Licenses for Salem, and
is authorized to possess Salem. Hope Creek and Salem are located
in Salem County, New Jersey, and Peach Bottom is located in York
and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania.
II By letter dated March 3, 2005, as supplemented by letters
dated May 24 and October 5, 2005, EGC submitted an application
requesting approval of direct license transfers that would be
necessary in connection with the transfer of the ownership
interests held by PSEG Nuclear in Peach Bottom to EGC. By letter
dated March 4, 2005, as supplemented by letters dated May 24 and
October 6, 2005, PSEG Nuclear submitted an application requesting
approval of direct license transfers that would be necessary in
connection with the transfer to EGC of the ownership interests
held by PSEG Nuclear in Hope Creek and Salem, and the transfer of
operating authority from PSEG Nuclear to EGC.
All of the foregoing requests for approval are associated with
the proposed merger of Public Service Enterprise Group (the
ultimate parent company of PSEG Nuclear) into Exelon Corporation
(the ultimate parent company of EGC). Upon completion of the
merger, Exelon Corporation will change its name to Exelon
Electric & Gas Corporation (EEG). EEG will then restructure its
organization.
EGC and PSEG Nuclear also requested NRC's approval of conforming
administrative license amendments that, in general, would reflect
the transfers of the licenses, to the extent held by PSEG
Nuclear, to EGC. No physical changes to the facilities or
operational changes were proposed in the applications. After
completion of the proposed license transfers, EGC would be the
sole owner and operator of the facilities.
EGC and PSEG Nuclear requested approval of the transfers of the
facility operating licenses and conforming license amendments
pursuant to Sections 50.80 and 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR). Notices of the requests for
approval and an opportunity for a hearing were published in the
Federal Register on August 2, 2005 (70 FR 44389, 70 FR 44397, and
70 FR 44398).
One petition for leave to intervene pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309 was
received on August 21, 2005, from Mr. Eric Joseph Epstein. By
Memorandum and Order CLI-05-26, dated October 26, 2005, the
Commission rejected Mr. Epstein's claim of standing and
consequently dismissed the proceeding. The Commission directed
the NRC staff to consider Mr. Epstein's contentions and
supplemental filing dated October 7, 2005, as if they were
``written comments'' under 10 CFR 2.1305. The written comments
have been considered by the NRC staff in connection with the
issuance of this Order.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, no license, or any right thereunder,
shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of
control of the license, unless the Commission shall give its
consent in writing. Upon review of the information in the
applications and other information before the Commission, and
relying upon the representations and agreements contained in the
applications, the NRC staff has determined that EGC is qualified
to hold the licenses for Hope Creek, Salem, and Peach Bottom as
proposed in the applications, and that the transfers of the
licenses as proposed in the applications are otherwise consistent
with applicable provisions of
[[Page 32376]] law, regulations, and orders issued by the
Commission, subject to the conditions set forth below. The NRC
staff has further found that the applications for the proposed
license amendments comply with the standards and requirements of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the
Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR chapter I;
the facilities will operate in conformity with the applications,
the provisions of the Act and the rules and regulations of the
Commission; there is reasonable assurance that the activities
authorized by the proposed license amendments can be conducted
without endangering the health and safety of the public and that
such activities will be conducted in compliance with the
Commission's regulations; the issuance of the proposed license
amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and
security or to the health and safety of the public; and the
issuance of the proposed amendments will be in accordance with 10
CFR part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable
requirements have been satisfied.
The findings set forth above are supported by an NRC safety
evaluation dated May 30, 2006.
III Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 161b, 161i, and 184 of the
Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2201(b), 2201(i), and 2234; and 10 CFR
50.80, it is hereby ordered that the direct transfers of the
licenses as described herein are approved, subject to the
following conditions: 1. At the time of the closing of the
transfers of the licenses from PSEG Nuclear to EGC, PSEG Nuclear
shall transfer to EGC all of PSEG Nuclear's respective
decommissioning funds accumulated as of such time, and EGC shall
deposit such funds in external decommissioning trust(s)
established by EGC for the respective units.
2. Before completion of the transfers of the interests in the
subject facilities to it, EGC shall provide to the Director of
the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation satisfactory documentary
evidence that EGC has obtained the appropriate amount of
insurance required of licensees under 10 CFR part 140,
``Financial Protection Requirements and Indemnity Agreements,''
of the Commission's regulations.
It is further ordered that, consistent with 10 CFR 2.1315(b),
license amendments that make changes, as indicated in Enclosures
2 through 6 to the cover letter forwarding this Order, to conform
the licenses to reflect the subject direct license transfers are
approved. The amendments shall be issued and made effective at
the time the proposed direct license transfers are completed.
It is further ordered that EGC shall inform the Director of the
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in writing of the date(s) of
closing of the direct transfers no later than 5 business days
prior to closing. Should the transfers of the licenses not be
completed by May 30, 2007, this Order shall become null and void,
provided, however, that upon written application and for good
cause shown, such date may be extended by Order.
This Order is effective upon issuance.
For further details with respect to this Order, see the initial
applications dated March 3 and March 4, 2005, and supplemental
letters dated May 24 (two), October 5, and October 6, 2005, and
the non- proprietary safety evaluation dated May 30, 2006, which
are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland and accessible electronically from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail
to
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of May
2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-8649 Filed 6-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
32 NRC: Yankee Atomic Electric Company; Yankee Atomic Independent Spent
FR Doc E6-8650
[Federal Register: June 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 107)]
[Notices] [Page 32377-32379] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05jn06-82]
Fuel Storage Installation; Issuance of Environmental Assessment
and Finding of No Significant Impact AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and finding of no
significant impact.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stewart W. Brown, Senior Project
Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-8531; Fax number:
(301) 415-8555; E-mail: swb1@nrc.gov. I. Introduction The U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of
exemptions to Yankee Atomic Electric Company (the licensee),
pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
72.7, from specific provisions of 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2),
72.212(b)(2)(i), 72.212(b)(7), and 72.214. The licensee is
storing spent nuclear fuel under the general licensing provisions
of 10 CFR part 72 in the NAC-MPC System at an independent spent
fuel storage installation (ISFSI) located at the Yankee Atomic
Electric Station in Rowe, Massachusetts. The requested exemptions
would allow the licensee to deviate from requirements of the
NAC-MPC Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1025, Amendment 3,
Appendix A, Technical Specifications for the NAC-MPC System,
Section A 5.1, Training Program, and Section A 5.4, Radioactive
Effluent Control Program. Specifically, the exemptions would
relieve the licensee from the requirements to: (1) Develop
training modules under its systems approach to training (SAT)
program that include comprehensive instructions for the operation
and maintenance of the ISFSI, except for the NAC-MPC System; and
(2) submit an annual report ``pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) or
10 CFR 50.36(a).'' II. Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The proposed action is to
exempt the licensee from regulatory requirements to develop
certain training and submit an annual report. By letter dated
January 9, 2006, the licensee requested exemptions
[[Page 32378]] from certain regulatory requirements of 10 CFR
72.212(a)(2), 72.212(b)(2)(i), 72.212(b)(7), and 72.214, which
require a general licensee to store spent fuel in an
NRC-certified spent fuel storage cask under the terms and
conditions set forth in the CoC. The proposed exemptions would
allow the licensee to deviate from the requirements in CoC No.
1025, Amendment 3, Appendix A, Technical Specifications for the
NAC-MPC System, Section A 5.1, Training Program, and Section A
5.4, Radioactive Effluent Control Program.
CoC No. 1025, Amendment 3, Appendix A, Technical Specifications
for the NAC-MPC System, Section A 5.1, Training Program, requires
that a training program for the NAC-MPC System be developed under
the general licensee's SAT program. Further, the training modules
must include comprehensive instructions for the operation and
maintenance of both the NAC-MPC System and the ISFSI. In
addition, CoC No. 1025, Amendment 3, Appendix A, Technical
Specifications for the NAC-MPC System, Section A 5.4, Radioactive
Effluent Control Program, Item c. requires an annual report to be
submitted ``pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) or 10 CFR 50.36(a).''
By exempting the licensee from the requirements of 10 CFR
72.212(a), 72.212(b)(2)(i), 72.212(b)(7), and 72.214 for this
request, the licensee will not be required to either develop
training modules that include comprehensive instructions for the
operation and maintenance of the ISFSI or submit an annual report
``pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) or 10 CFR 50.36(a).'' The
proposed action before the NRC is whether to grant these
exemptions under the provisions of 10 CFR 72.7. Need for the
Proposed Action: The requirements of CoC No.
1025, Amendment 3, Appendix A, Technical Specifications for the
NAC-MPC System, Section A 5.1, Training Program, and Section A
5.4, Radioactive Effluent Control Program impose regulatory
obligations, with associated costs, that do not provide a
commensurate increase in safety.
Granting the requested exemptions will allow the licensee not to
have to: (1) Develop training modules under the SAT program that
include comprehensive instructions for the operation and
maintenance of the ISFSI, except for the NAC-MPC System; and (2)
submit an annual report ``pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) or 10
CFR 50.36(a).'' Thus, the licensee will not incur the costs
associated with these activities.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The NRC has
reviewed the exemption requests submitted by the licensee and
determined that not requiring the licensee to: (1) Develop
training modules under its SAT program that include comprehensive
instructions for the operation and maintenance of the ISFSI,
except for the NAC-MPC System; and (2) submit an annual report
``pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) or 10 CFR 50.36(a)'' are
administrative changes, and would have no significant impacts to
the environment.
Further, NRC has evaluated the impact to public safety that would
result from granting the requested exemptions. NRC determined
that requiring the licensee to develop training modules under its
SAT program for the operation and maintenance of ISFSI
structures, systems, and components considered
not-important-to-safety would not provide a commensurate increase
in public safety associated with the costs. Therefore, allowing
the licensee to develop these modules separately from its SAT
program does not impact public safety. Also, NRC has determined
that not requiring the licensee to submit an annual report
specifying principal radionuclides released to the environment in
liquid and in gaseous effluents does not impact public safety
because the NAC-MPC System is a sealed and leak-tight spent fuel
storage system. Thus, there should be no releases to the
environment of either liquid or gaseous effluents from normal
operation of the NAC-MPC System.
The proposed action would not increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, no changes would be made to the types
of effluents that may be released offsite, and there would be no
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore,
there are no significant radiological environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action. Additionally the proposed
action would have no significant non-radiological impacts.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: The alternative to the
proposed action would be to deny approval of these exemptions.
Denial of these exemption requests would have the same
environmental impact as the proposed action.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The NRC prepared this EA. No
other sources were used. Further, The NRC has determined that a
consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not
required because the proposed action will not affect listed
species or critical habitats. The NRC has also determined that
the proposed action is not a type of activity having the
potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no
consultation is required under section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. Also, a draft copy of this EA was
provided to the Massachusetts Radiation Control Program for
review. The Massachusetts Radiation Control Program had no
comments.
Conclusions: The NRC has concluded that the proposed action of
granting these exemptions and not requiring the licensee to
develop certain training or submit an annual report will not
significantly impact the quality of the human environment and
does not warrant the preparation of an environmental impact
statement. Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of
No Significant Impact is appropriate.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact The environmental impacts
of the proposed action have been reviewed in accordance with the
requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51.
Based upon the foregoing EA, the NRC finds that the proposed
action of granting exemptions from the specific provisions of 10
CFR 72.212(a), 72.212(b)(2)(i), 72.212(b)(7), and 72.214 and not
requiring the licensee to: (1) Develop training modules under its
SAT program that include comprehensive instructions for the
operation and maintenance of the ISFSI, except for the NAC-MPC
System; and (2) submit an annual report ``pursuant to 10 CFR
72.44(d)(3) or 10 CFR 50.36(a),'' will not significantly impact
the quality of the human environment.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined that an environmental impact
statement for these proposed exemptions is not warranted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390
of NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' final NRC records and documents
regarding this proposed action, including the request for
exemptions dated January 9, 2006, are publically available in the
records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS).
These documents may be inspected at NRC's Public Electronic
Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. These
documents may also be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.
The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-
[[Page 32379]] 397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of May,
2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Stewart W. Brown, Sr. Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-8650 Filed 6-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
33 NRC: Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generating
FR Doc E6-8651
[Federal Register: June 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 107)]
[Notices] [Page 32376-32377] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05jn06-81]
Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating
License No.
DPR-22, issued to the Nuclear Management Company (the licensee)
for operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP),
located in Wright County, Minnesota. Pursuant to Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Sections 51.21 and 51.32,
the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of
no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would be a conversion from the current
Technical Specifications (CTSs) to the Improved Technical
Specifications (ITSs) format based on NUREG-1433, ``Standard
Technical Specifications General Electric Plants BWR/4,''
Revision 3, dated June 2004. The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee's application dated June 29, 2005, as
supplemented by letters dated April 25 (two letters), May 4, and
May 12, 2006.
The Need for the Proposed Action The Commission's ``Proposed
Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for
Nuclear Power Reactors'' (52 FR 3788), dated February 6, 1987,
contained an Interim Policy Statement that set forth objective
criteria for determining which regulatory requirements and
operating restrictions should be included in the technical
specifications (TSs) for nuclear power plants. When it issued the
Interim Policy Statement, the Commission also requested comments
on it. Subsequently, to implement the Interim Policy Statement,
each reactor vendor owners group and the NRC staff began
developing standard TSs (STSs) for reactors supplied by each
vendor. The Commission then published its ``Final Policy
Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear
Power Reactors'' (58 FR 39132), dated July 22, 1993, in which it
addressed comments received on the Interim Policy Statement, and
incorporated experience in developing the STSs.
The Final Policy Statement formed the basis for a revision to 10
CFR 50.36 (60 FR 36953), dated July 19, 1995, that codified the
criteria for determining the content of TSs. The NRC Committee to
Review Generic Requirements reviewed the STSs, made note of their
safety merits, and indicated its support of conversion by
operating plants to the STSs. For MNGP, NUREG-1433 documents the
STSs and forms the basis for the MNGP conversion to the ITSs.
The proposed changes to the CTSs are based on NUREG-1433 and the
guidance provided in the Final Policy Statement. The objective of
this action is to rewrite, reformat, and streamline
[[Page 32377]] the CTSs (i.e., to convert the CTSs to the ITSs).
Emphasis was placed on human factors principles to improve
clarity and understanding.
Some specifications in the CTSs would be relocated. Such
relocated specifications would include those requirements which
do not meet the 10 CFR 50.36 selection criteria. These
requirements may be relocated to the TS Bases document, the MNGP
Updated Safety Analysis Report, the Core Operating Limits Report,
the operational quality assurance plan, plant procedures, or
other licensee-controlled documents.
Relocating requirements to licensee-controlled documents does not
eliminate them, but rather places them under more appropriate
regulatory controls (i.e., 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3), and 10 CFR 50.59)
to manage their implementation and future changes.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff has
completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes
that the conversion to ITSs would not increase the probability or
consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would not
affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological
effluents.The proposed action will not increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the
types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no
significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off
site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public
radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites
because no previously undisturbed area will be affected by the
proposed amendment. The proposed action does not affect
non-radiological plant effluents and has no other effect on the
environment. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no
significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action and, thus, the proposed action will not have any
significant impact to the human environment.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff
considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action''
alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change
in current environmental impacts. Thus, the environmental impacts
of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use
of any different resources than those previously considered in
the Final Environmental Statement for MNGP dated November 1974.
Agencies and Persons Consulted On April 18, 2006, the NRC staff
consulted with Mr. Steve Rakow of the Minnesota Department of
Commerce regarding the environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official agreed with the conclusions of the
NRC.
Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the
environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed
action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated June 29, 2005, as supplemented by letters
dated April 25 (two letters), May 4, and May 12, 2006, and the
information provided to the NRC staff through the joint
NRC-Monticello Nuclear Power Plant ITS Conversion Web page.
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on
the Internet at the NRC Web site, .
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or
301-415- 4737, or by e-mail to .
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of May 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Terry A. Beltz, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-8651 Filed 6-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
34 AFP: Greenpeace protests third-generation nuclear plant in Finland -
Mon Jun 5, 6:46 AM ET
HELSINKI (AFP) - Greenpeace activists have protested in Helsinki
against the construction of a third-generation EPR nuclear power
station in Finland, as French Prime Minister Dominique de
Villepin was due to visit the site.
Around a dozen activists from the environmental group set up a
five-metre-high (16-feet-high) inflatable structure meant to
represent a nuclear plant topped with a missile in front of the
Finnish parliament, where de Villepin was meeting with the
president of the parliament Paavo Lipponen.
The protesters greeted Villepin and Lipponen Monday as they left
the building with signs saying "Stop EPR," "EPR, no thank you"
and "French nuclear = disaster".
They were referring to the European Pressurised Reactor, a joint
Franco-German project that is the first third-generation nuclear
plant in the world.
France is planning to build its own EPR nuclear power station in
Flamanville, in western France, and the design could also be
adopted by Britain.
Greenpeace opposes the revival of nuclear energy at the expense
of renewable energy sources, as well as the cost to French
taxpayers if construction is delayed -- it is currently nine
months behind schedule -- and the risk of terrorist attacks on
the plant.
But advocates of the project say EPR is safer, more economical
and more efficient than previous-generation reactors.
Villepin arrived late Sunday in Finland for a two-day working
visit.
On Monday he also met with his Finnish counterpart, Matti
Vanhanen, Finland's President Tarja Halonen, and the head of
mobile phone group Nokia
" /> , Olli-Pekka Kallusvuo.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: RIC 2006 Conference Program
RIC 2006 Conference Program
The Program and Conference Schedule [PDF icon] provides RIC
2006 session information. Presentations and speeches made at the
conference are available below.
For a schedule of the Poster Sessions, please see our Poster
Sessions by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) Web
page.
The IOUs and Action Items list [PDF icon] provides responses to
questions which were not answered at the conference, and
followup responses to actions that were taken away from the
conference.
The Registrant List [PDF icon] (updated March 9, 2006) -
provides the name, business address, phone number, and email
address of conference registrants who gave permission to post
their information on-line.
For a schedule of the Poster Sessions, please see our Poster
Sessions by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) Web
page.
Organization Charts - USNRC | NRR | RES | NMSS | NSIR
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
Session Session Name Name of Presenter/ Presentation
Type
P1 Welcome
Jim Dyer
Carl J. Paperiello
(with Carl Paperiello and Luis Reyes)
P2 Plenary Session
Nils J. Diaz, NRC Chairman
Speech | Presentation |
P3 Regulatory Trends Jim Dyer
Presentation |
P4 Plenary Session
Edward McGaffigan, Jr., NRC Commissioner
Speech | Presentation |
T1BC Fuels - Cladding Behavior for Regulatory Applications
Paul Clifford
Robert Einziger
Albert J. Machiels
Ralph Meyer
Rosa Yang: LOCA | RIA
T1D
Fire Protection - Risk-Informed and Performance-Bases
Joe W. Donahue
James E. Lyons
Alex Marion
Sunil D. Weerakkody
T1E Licensing Issues Pamela B. Cowan
James J. Fisicaro
John F. McCann
Michael D. Tschiltz
T1F License Renewal Kenneth Chang
Rani Franovich
Patricia Lougheed
Louise Lund
Garry G. Young
License Renewal Poster
T1GH Rulemaking Jim Davis
Gary M. Holahan
Michael T. Lesar
Jim Riccio
T2BC Severe Accident Research Sudhamay Basu
Robert Henry
Thomas Kress
Michel Vidard
Richard Wachowiak
T2D New Reactor Licensing, Preparing for Combined License
Reviews Session Intro
Joseph Colaccino
Joseph D. Hegner
Phillip Ray
Rebecca Smith-Kevern
Session Closing
T2E Use of Operating Experience
(Regulator/Operator/Licensee) Session Intro
Vincent Coulehan
Barry Kaufer
John Kauffman
Mary Jane Ross-Lee
Mark Satorius
T2F Allegations Samuel J. Collins
J. Bradley Fewell
Billie Pirner-Garde
Nick Hilton
Rocco Scanza
T2GH Emergency Preparedness - Lessons Learned from
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
*Due to the size of this presentation, the pages are provided in
sections. Michael S. Beeman
Neal Fudge*
Pages: | 1-3 | 4-6 | 7-9 | 10-12 |
13-15 | 16-18 | 19-21 | 22-24 | 25-27 | 28-30 | 31-33 | 34-36 |
37-39 | 40-42 | 43-45 | 46-48 | 49-51 | 52-54 | 55-57 | 58-60 |
61-63 | 64-66 | 67-69 | 70-73 |
Linda L. Howell
Joe Venable
Wednesday, March 8, 2006
Session Session Name Name of Presenter/ Presentation
Type
P5 Plenary Session: RES Carl J. Paperiello
Speech | Presentation |
P6 Plenary Session Jeffrey S. Merrifield, NRC
Commissioner
Speech | Presentation |
W3BC Risk-Informed Regulatory Structure for Future
Reactors Charles E. Ader
Kenneth R. Balkey
Mary T. Drouin
Mark R. Holbrook
Eileen M. McKenna
W3BRK Yucca Mountain
Paul Golan
Steven Kraft
Martin Malsch
Bill W. Reamer
W3D GSI 191 John C. Butler
Maurice E. Dingler
Paul A. Klein
Brian W. Sheron
Robert L. Tregoning
W3F International Perspectives
Guy Clapisson
Olivier Gupta for A. C. Lacoste
Jukka Laaksonen
Andrey Malyshev
W3GH Safety Culture Initiatives and Implications Bruce
A. Boger
Michael T. Coyle
Sonja B. Haber
David Lochbaum
P7 Plenary Session Gregory B. Jaczko, NRC Commissioner
Speech |
P8 Plenary Session Peter B. Lyons, NRC Commissioner
Speech |
W4BC Advanced Reactors - GEN IV
Research and Licensing Strategies for the NGNP Trevor Cook
James G. Danna
Andrew Kadak
Larry Parme
Stuart Rubin
Edward G. Wallace
W4D Risk-Informed Activities - Status and Direction
William E. Burchill
Robert Lutz
Tony Pietrangelo
Gerry Sowers
Michael D. Tschiltz
W4E ROP - Assessment Program Update Session (all
presentations combined)
W4F Current Seismic Issues and Associated Research
Goutam Bagchi
Lloyd S. Cluff
Robert P. Kennedy
Andrew J. Murphy
Carl J. Stepp
W4GH Spent Fuel Management
Kevin Crowley
Robert Halstead
Steven Kraft
Gary Lanthrum
John Parkyn
[To top of page]
Thursday, March 9, 2006
Session Session Name Name of Presenter/ Presentation
Type
Th5BC
Materials Degradation
Omesh Chopra
Karen Gott
Robin L. Jones
Mark T. Erickson Kirk
Wallace E. Norris
Th5D
Digital Instrumentation and Control - Diversity and
Defense-in-Depth for Digital Systems
T. Preston Gillespie, Jr.
Allen G. Howe
Jukka Laaksonen
Raymond C. Torok
Th5E
ROP Inspection Program Update
Russell Gibbs
Cynthia Pederson
Tony Pietrangelo
Jerry Roberts
Th5F
Construction Inspection Program (CIP) and Inspection, Tests,
Analyses and Acceptance (ITAAC)
Mary Ann M. Ashley and Joseph Colaccino
Ben J. George
Peter S. Hastings
Th5GH Security - Security Program Update and Path Forward
Daniel H. Dorman
Morgan Rafferty
NSIR Brochure
NSIR Poster
RG1BC Region I Breakout Session (all presentations
combined)
RG2D Region II Breakout
Ashok Bhatnagar - Presentation 1, Presentation 2
William Travers and Jim Dyer
RG3E Region III Breakout Session (all presentations
combined)
RG4GH Region IV Breakout Joseph V. Parrish
Last revised Wednesday, May 31, 2006
*****************************************************************
36 AK&M: Rosatom considers constructing 2-4 power units more at Kalininskaya NPP.
05/06/2006 12:55
The Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) considers constructing
2-4 power-generating units more at Kalininskaya Nuclear Power
Plant in the Tver Region, as Rosatom's Head Sergey Kirienko
declared at the ecological subbotnik in Udomlya (Tver Region).
According to him, these plans are of the long-term outlook. The
power units may be built on the neighbouring site next of the
industrial complex near Ulomlya. But at first a serious
evaluation should be done, said Mr. Kirienko.
He also added that Rosatom considers building a pumped storage
plant in this region to provide for the regulation balance of
peak loads.
At present, 3 power units of 1 th MW are in operation at
Kalininskaya NPP.
"AK", 05/06/2006 10:57
Tel: (7-095) 916-70-30 / 71-51 (7-095) 132-61-76 / 61-73 Fax:
(7-095) 132-69-18 / 60-93 (7-095) 916-71-64 / 70-71 e-mail:
postmail@akm.ru Copyright © 1996-2005 AK&M
*****************************************************************
37 NEWS.com.au: Howard is drifting without an agenda -
By Glenn Milne
June 05, 2006
IN most quarters at the weekend, John Howard's backflip with
pike over the privatisation of Snowy Hydro was being hailed as
an act of political genius. But was it?
Or rather, was it symptomatic of a Government that is suffering
a mid-term loss of direction and has taken its eye off the ball?
Is this an administration that has started to fray at the edges?
OK, Howard skewered both New South Wales Labor Premier Morris
Iemma and his Victorian counterpart, Steve Bracks, with the
decision to scuttle the Snowy sale. But this was not his
intention. Rather, it was an unintended consequence flowing from
the actions of a panicked leader who had fundamentally misread
the public mood.
Canberra simply wandered into this potential political disaster.
Owning only 13 per cent of Snowy Hydro it simply went along with
Iemma, the biggest shareholder, when NSW proposed the sale.
Iemma needed the cash to fund his re-election, and Howard
apparently thought that as the feds' shareholding was so small,
they should just accede. That is until he discovered the depth
of voter resistance.
Indeed, Howard admitted last week he'd underestimated the voter
backlash to the disposal of a genuine national monument because
he'd been overseas for 12 days. So, Howard jumped ship, bringing
the whole stack of cards, Iemma and Bracks included, down as
well.
But if this was such a good idea in the first place - and Howard
was arguing as much only last week - who made the initial
judgment in favour of the sale, and why?
The answer surely has to be that the Government - and Howard in
particular - failed to pick up that the sale of Snowy Hydro was a
sensitive issue that needed to be sold in the public marketplace
if it was to succeed.
Who was out there in the months leading to the planned float
putting the case that because the Commonwealth was the minority
shareholder it could do little to influence the outcome?
Instead, the Government simply took the public for granted.
The final result: a full policy retreat.
And, again, where was the political assessment, since
articulated by Howard's Parliamentary Secretary for Water,
Malcolm Turnbull, that given the national historical
significance of the Snowy Mountains Scheme, 13 per cent holding
or not, it was always going to be the Federal Government that
would wear the brunt of the political fallout of the sale?
Nowhere. Howard almost drove the Government over a cliff before
he threw to reverse gear at the last moment. Now he's being
hailed as a saviour. Yet the Government should never have been
in this position in the first place.
Let's look at a few other symptoms of drift and lack of
political touch, starting with the PM's recent trip to
Washington, Ottawa and Dublin.
I've spoken to former staffers of previous prime ministers
familiar with the protocol of such grand tours. The host state,
they say, offers you a program. But it is always acceptable for
the visiting dignitary to accept or reject that offer. So when
George W. Bush said words to Howard to the effect: "Hell boy,
we're gonna give you a full state visit and throw in a White
House black-tie dinner to boot", it would have been within
Howard's discretion to say quietly, and without offence:
"Appreciate the offer. But time's tight. Let's just do a more
low-key working visit."
Instead he went for the top-drawer treatment in all three
countries, inevitably fuelling leadership speculation about a
final lap of honour. Allied to this was commentary among the
travelling press that the trip lacked a central policy focus.
Hey presto! Suddenly the PM discovered nuclear power. But just
like the Snowy, this is a debate that has suddenly been sprung
on the Australian people. And there is no guarantee about where
it will end up. As one senior Liberal put it to me: "The nuclear
issue has come out of the blue. People want from their
governments a sense of optimism about where the country is
heading and how the policies needed to justify that optimism
will affect their lives. That's not nuclear power stations.
Nuclear power is not the top order in people's minds. It's less
than the bottom."
What is usually at the head of the list of voter concerns is the
economy. And on this front the Government has indisputably
delivered.
So, pursuing the dual themes of complacency and sloppy political
management, why didn't the Coalition get a poll bounce out of
Peter Costello's blockbuster Budget?
Almost everybody got something: tax cuts for all, increases in
family payments, more childcare places and superannuation
breaks. But as in the case of the Snowy and the issue of nuclear
power, there was also no coherent national interest narrative to
sell the Budget. No concerted message about how all these
giveaways hung together for the sake of the country. So always
cynical voters have simply seen it as a grab-bag of bribes and
treated it accordingly in terms of the political dividends for
the Government.
Then there's the aborted merger between the Queensland Nationals
and Liberals and the threat it posed to the Coalition federally.
Like the Snowy, Howard and National Party leader Mark Vaile
managed to wriggle free of a potential disaster. But again:
where were the political antennae? Why was this allowed to get
so far in the first place without the approval of the Nationals'
leadership?
It's suggestive of a Government that's no longer sufficiently on
edge to sniff out either political danger or opportunity, a
reflection perhaps of the fact that after 10 years in office the
majority of government MPs and staffers have never known the
hunger of Opposition.
What's not generally known is that the NSW legislation enabling
the relevant minister to dispose of the Government's share in
Snowy Hydro was actually passed in June 1997. The NSW Liberals
and Nationals opposed the bill. But it passed with the support
of the Democrats, the Christian Democrats, some Independents and
- wait for it - the Greens. So where was the Government when Bob
Brown was down in Cooma last week at a Greens rally condemning
the sale? Nowhere.
Howard, of course, has been in mid-term troughs before: notably
in 2001 and in early 1998, and has always recovered. Now, as
then, what was lacking during both those periods was a
forward-looking policy agenda, a central focus for the
Government. In 1998 he responded by putting the GST on the
agenda and voters rallied to a national plan. But the dynamics
are different this time. Howard now finds himself in a
cleft-stick situation. The Government is drifting politically -
just look at the last three Newspolls - but if he does announce
a bold new policy program for the next three years he invites an
immediate leadership confrontation with Peter Costello.
Let's return for a moment to the Queensland amalgamation
disaster. Former Queensland Labor senator John Black, whose
research has featured previously in this column, runs an online
polling survey. Last week he put questions regarding the merger
to respondents. One elderly traditional female Liberal voter
responded thus: "Two horses' arses do not make a whole and
healthy horse." A reasonable postscript to what has to be seen
as a scrappy week for John Howard. Search for
*****************************************************************
38 AU ABC: Nuclear power viable, ANSTO says
AM - Monday, 5 June , 2006 08:11:00
Reporter: Tony Eastley
TONY EASTLEY: To have a viable home-grown nuclear power
industry Australia would need to build four or five nuclear
power plants on Australia's east coast.
The Chief Executive of the Australian Nuclear Science and
Technology Organisation (ANSTO), Ian Smith, says nuclear power
is a viable alternative to coal-fired power plants in Australia.
ANSTO has presented a report to Federal Cabinet outlining the
economic viability of nuclear power generation.
Tomorrow, Cabinet will consider the terms of reference for an
inquiry into Australia's nuclear power generation options.
Earlier this morning I spoke to the head of ANSTO, Ian Smith.
IAN SMITH: The report concludes, at this point of time in the
Australian situation, that nuclear power is competitive with
coal-fired power for the baseload generation of electricity in
Australia.
TONY EASTLEY: But in terms of economics at the moment, Australia
has a lot of coal, and albeit fairly cheap coal on a world
scale, is nuclear power cheaper than coal?
IAN SMITH: This report finds that the electricity produced,
averaged over the lifetime of the power station, is about the
same, if not a little lower, than that of a coal-fired power
station constructed at the same time.
TONY EASTLEY: In the case of this report, do you talk there
about the generation of electricity from one power plant, or a
number of them?
IAN SMITH: The report is an economic analysis, so it doesn't
assume that. I think in reality we do … a nuclear operation
would require more than one power plant.
TONY EASTLEY: And when you talk about an operation, that is
supplying power to how many cities, to how many people, do you
think?
IAN SMITH: This would be, power stations would go on the main
grids and we'd supply electricity into those main grids. The … I
mean, if a normal fleet of about four or five nuclear power
stations would produce something in the vicinity of 5,000
megawatts of power.
TONY EASTLEY: I'm sorry, did you say four or five?
IAN SMITH: Yes.
TONY EASTLEY: Where would you see those stations being sited?
IAN SMITH: Well, I think that there's a long way to go before
you look at siting of these stations. The first thing the
Government has to do is to make a decision. It then has to put
the regulatory and legislative framework in place. It then has
to decide who's going to be the operator of these stations. And
then it's a relatively simple task to find technologically
feasible places to place them, but that's a long way down the
track.
TONY EASTLEY: As a matter of necessity, would those stations be
likely sited in major states, rather than sort of, you know,
less populated states?
IAN SMITH: Because nuclear power produces large quantities of
power, it would need to be on the major grid.
TONY EASTLEY: So we're talking sort of east coast?
IAN SMITH: We're talking about … yes, the east coast is the
major grid in Australia.
TONY EASTLEY: What is the next step now? After ANSTO's report,
there will be an inquiry, how long do you think that will take?
IAN SMITH: I think that inquiry, if you compare it with
international inquiries, will probably take around six months to
gather the facts, and then it will be for the Government to
decide how it proceeds from there.
TONY EASTLEY: And that inquiry will make the necessary
comparisons between what power is available to Australia at the
moment, comparing it to the nuclear alternatives?
IAN SMITH: I think that one of the driving forces of this is the
major effects of climate change. Australia at the moment is the
highest emitter of carbon per head of any country in the world.
The global problem for carbon emissions is 40 billion tonnes of
carbon dioxide a year. This needs urgent action. Part of that
action is nuclear power. It certainly is overseas, and I guess
this inquiry will decide whether Australia should contribute to
reducing its high carbon emissions through nuclear, as one of
the options included with the other options of wind and solar,
et cetera.
TONY EASTLEY: The Chief Executive of the Australian Nuclear
Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), Ian Smith, speaking
there with me earlier this morning.
*****************************************************************
39 AU ABC: Expert foresees problems in nuclear power regulation
AM - Monday, 5 June , 2006 08:14:00
Reporter: Karen Barlow
TONY EASTLEY: Any decision to proceed would require a new
regulatory body to oversee nuclear generation in Australia and
one expert says problems between state and federal governments
is likely to torpedo any chances of Australia's nuclear industry
getting off the ground.
Karen Barlow reports.
KAREN BARLOW: Nuclear expert, Dr Adam Jostsons, is a former
ANSTO (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation)
employee and former staffer at the Australian High Commission in
London.
ADAM JOSTSONS: My real problem is that there are real
impediments to an early start-up, and they have much to do with
Australia as a federation and the responsibilities between
states and federal governments. And these have to be addressed
before we can really provide a market for somebody to say yes,
in that environment I have the technology and I can build a
nuclear power station to be competitive.
KAREN BARLOW: Dr Adam Jostsons says the Labor states have all
taken up anti-nuclear positions, although he doesn't believe a
nuclear power plant would be built in any state other than the
biggest power users, NSW and Victoria.
ADAM JOSTSONS: According to our constitution, electricity is a
state matter. And if you look at federal government, federal
government, I can't believe, will build the reactor. They are
selling everything as a government, apart from their share in
Snowy.
So really, you've got to say is there a regulator? There is a
regulator for ANSTO and some nuclear or radiation issues that
the Commonwealth is involved. But they do not regulate similar
activities in the states.
Now, that requires for some consensus to emerge between the
states and the federal government on the creation of a nuclear
regulator that would be consistent with our international
agreements under IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and
organisations like that.
KAREN BARLOW: So how would that work if the states are rejecting?
ADAM JOSTSONS: I don't know how it would work. And in fact, I
don't imagine that anyone would want to invest their money under
a climate like that to build a power plant.
TONY EASTLEY: Nuclear power expert Dr Adam Jostsons ending that
report from Karen Barlow.
*****************************************************************
40 AU ABC: Nuclear reactor not welcome in Goulburn, mayor says.
05/06/2006. ABC News Online
First Posted: Monday, June 5, 2006 . 12:09pm --> Last
Goulburn's Mayor Paul Stephenson says his city would not welcome
a nuclear reactor.
The city was listed in a 1990s report, made public last week,
as a possible nuclear site.
Councillor Stephenson says he doubts local residents would like
the idea of a reactor in their town.
"I don't rule anything out but I just think it's a bit divisive
for these things to be dropped into the public arena without the
public even being told they're being considered as part of it,"
he said.
*****************************************************************
41 AU ABC: PM warns against nuclear 'fear campaign'.
05/06/2006. ABC News Online
Long-term debate: Mr Howard is warning against nuclear scare
campaigns. (ABC)
Prime Minister John Howard says the debate about nuclear energy
is a long-term issue, and should not be used for short-term
political gain.
Federal Cabinet is setting up an inquiry into nuclear power
generation, which will consider whether it can reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and its economic viability.
A Government-commissioned report from ANSTO shows nuclear power
is price-competitive with coal-generated electricity.
It also says Australia would need to build up to five nuclear
power plants to make a domestic industry viable.
Labor is demanding to know where they will be built, but Mr
Howard has dismissed the request.
"I don't intend it to be knocked off course by a fear campaign
waged by the Labor Party, which only worries about tomorrow or
the next opinion poll, but not about the next generation," he
said.
Labor's Anthony Albanese says the Government's inquiry is a
sham.
"I'm sure the Prime Minister's panel, which he'll announce
tomorrow, will be stacked with proponents of the nuclear power
industry," he said.
But the Prime Minister says the panellists will be experts in
the area.
In other developments:
+ The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation
(ANSTO) has dismissed concerns about the independence of a
report which has found nuclear power is price-competitive with
coal-generated electricity. ()
+ The chief executive of the Australian Nuclear Science and
Technology Organisation (ANSTO) says nuclear power is a viable
alternative to coal-fired power in Australia. ()
+ Prime Minister John Howard has declined to reveal details
about who will conduct his inquiry into nuclear power. ()
+ The Prime Minister has unveiled details of his inquiry into
nuclear power, ahead of formal approval of the review at
tomorrow's federal Cabinet meeting. ()
+ The Victorian Government says Australia should invest more
in renewable energy, instead of spending money to investigate a
nuclear power industry. ()
*****************************************************************
42 AU ABC: Credibility of nuclear report questioned
PM - Monday, 5 June , 2006 18:13:28
Reporter: Stephen Long
MARK COLVIN: Questions are being asked tonight about the
credibility of a new report promoting Australian nuclear power,
because of its author's financial links to the nuclear industry.
Professor John Gittus examined the economic case for power for
the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, or
ANSTO.
Professor Gittus happens to run a company that insures the vast
majority of the world's nuclear power stations.
The Government and ANSTO are claiming that the report shows that
nuclear power makes economic sense. And yet the detail of the
report finds that building nuclear power stations would not be
viable without massive Government support.
Economics Correspondent Stephen Long has been looking at the
small print.
STEPHEN LONG: The report's called "Introducing Nuclear Power To
Australia", and the disclosure comes on page 264 of its 267
pages.
It says the author, Professor John H Gittus, runs Lloyd's of
London Syndicate 1176. It insures almost all of the world's
nuclear power station, and makes big profits from that endeavour.
But the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation,
which commissioned the report, denies that undermines its
credibility.
ANSTO's Executive Director is Ian Smith:
IAN SMITH: To say that's a conflict of interest is really
stretching the point, in that there's not likely to be a nuclear
power station in Australia for 10 years, how it was insured is
not something that will be influenced by this report.
STEPHEN LONG: But some experts say Professor Gittus is a paid up
member of the nuclear club. Dr Mark Diesendorf researches
sustainable energy and ecological economics at the University of
New South Wales.
MARK DIESENDORF: Well my understanding is that he's very deeply
embedded in the nuclear industry himself, and that's he's held a
number of positions in there. And I have actually heard that
he's actually runs a company that insures nuclear power
stations.
STEPHEN LONG: Indeed it's disclosed that he runs a Lloyd's
company that is the biggest insurer of nuclear installations,
and insures just about all the nuclear installations in the
world.
MARK DIESENDORF: Well then it seems to me that there is a clear
conflict of interest here.
STEPHEN LONG: ANSTO and the Federal Government maintain the
Gittus report shows that nuclear power is the world's cheapest
source of energy. In fact, some of its key findings appear to
undermine the economic case for nuclear power.
It looks at the cost of a new style or first of a kind reactor.
And it shows that unless the Government took on more than half
the financial risk of building it, nuclear energy would not be
viable. It would cost twice as much as coal-fired power, and any
private operator that took on the costs and risks, the report
says, would quickly go into liquidation.
Mark Diesendorf says this contradicts the claims that nuclear
power is cheap, cost effective and viable.
MARK DIESENDORF: I draw the opposite conclusion. The report
shows that very large subsidies would be required for nuclear
power if it was introduced in Australia.
And what's more, the report uses as a case study for the
economics, a nuclear power station that doesn't actually exist
at present except on paper. So really this is pie in the sky.
STEPHEN LONG: It'd be cheaper if Australia merely copied an
established style of reactor. But even then, the Government
would need to pay more than 14 per cent of the construction cost
to make it viable. And it would need to provide to subsidise the
energy produced to the tune of about 21 per cent for 12 years,
the report finds.
The report also assumes that Government bears at least half the
liability for any nuclear accident, without which Ian Smith at
ANSTO concedes, nuclear power would be uninsurable.
IAN SMITH: I think that nuclear viability is another topic which
traditionally in the world, governments have picked up. They've
never had to pay anything for it, but they have in fact
undertaken to cover that risk because it then provides a greater
degree of certainty in a difficult market to insure the risks.
STEPHEN LONG: Mark Diesendorf says this is further evidence that
nuclear energy isn't viable.
MARK DIESENDORF: Well that contradicts the claim that this is
economic, because the financial risk has to be part of the
market process. So what this is saying is that the Australian
Government wants to continue the same kind of subsidies to
nuclear power that have been given over the last few decades in
the United States and Britain. And we're talking really about
$US 90 billion subsidy in the United States over the last 50
years.
STEPHEN LONG: Britain meanwhile is now facing a 90 billion pound
bill for the cost of cleaning up its ageing nuclear reactors.
And that could lead to a rethink of plans to build a new
generation of nuclear power stations in the UK.
MARK COLVIN: Economics Correspondent Stephen Long.
*****************************************************************
43 AU ABC: Nuclear proposal dangerous for SA: Rann.
05/06/2006. ABC News Online
South Australian Premier Mike Rann has used his World
Environment Day speech to criticise a federal submission that
suggests sites near Adelaide would be suitable for a nuclear
research reactor.
The 1997 document suggests Mt Lofty Ranges or farming areas
east of Adelaide could be sites for a nuclear research reactor.
Mr Rann told Parliament it is a dangerous proposal.
"I wonder weather the natural resource management board and
tourism and wine industry bodies in the Adelaide Hills would
agree," he said.
The Premier also highlighted the Government's environmental
credentials in returning water to the River Murray,
restructuring the Environment Protection Authority and stopping
a national radioactive waste dump.
But Greens MP Mark Parnell says Mr Rann should not criticise the
Federal Government when he supports more uranium mining.
Mr Parnell says more investment should be made in solar and
wind generated power.
*****************************************************************
44 AU ABC: ANSTO dismisses conflict of interest claims.
05/06/2006. ABC News Online
Independence concerns: Professor Gittus runs a nuclear plant
insurer. [File photo] (AFP) [ border=]
By Stephen Long for PM
The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation
(ANSTO) has dismissed concerns about the independence of a
report which has found nuclear power is price-competitive with
coal-generated electricity.
The Greens have questioned the neutrality of the report's
author, Professor John Gittus.
Professor Gittus runs Lloyd's of London Syndicate 1176, which
insures almost all of the world's nuclear power stations.
But the head of ANSTO, Ian Smith, has defended the independence
of the report.
"To say that's a conflict of interest is really stretching the
point in that there's not likely to be a nuclear power station
in Australia for 10 years," he said.
"How it was insured is not something that will be influenced by
this report."
But Dr Mark Diesendorf, who researches sustainable energy and
ecological economics at the University of New South Wales, is
not convinced.
"My understanding is that [Professor Gittus's] very deeply
embedded in the nuclear industry himself and that's he's held a
number of positions in there," Dr Diesendorf said.
"It seems to me that there is a clear conflict of interest
here."
Findings questioned
The ANSTO report is called Introducing Nuclear Power to
Australia.
Both the organisation and the Federal Government maintain it
shows that nuclear power is the world's cheapest source of
energy.
But some of its key findings appear to undermine the economic
case for nuclear power.
The report shows that unless the Government took on more than
half the financial risk of building a first-of-a-kind reactor,
nuclear energy would not be viable.
It says the nuclear power generated would cost twice as much as
coal-fired power, and any private operator that took on the
costs and risks would quickly go into liquidation.
Dr Diesendorf says this contradicts the claims that nuclear
power is cheap, cost-effective and viable.
"I draw the opposite conclusion," he said.
"The report shows that very large subsidies would be required
for nuclear power if it was introduced in Australia.
"What's more, the report uses as a case study for the economics,
a nuclear power station that doesn't actually exist at present
except on paper.
"So really this is pie in the sky."
The report says it would be cheaper to being producing nuclear
power if Australia copies an established style of reactor.
But even then, the report says Government would need to pay more
than 14 per cent of the construction cost to make it viable.
It would also need to subsidise the energy produced to the tune
of about 21 per cent for 12 years.
Insurance risks
The report also assumes that Government bears at least half the
liability for any nuclear accident.
Mr Smith concedes that without that provision, nuclear power
would be uninsurable.
"I think that nuclear viability is another topic which
traditionally in the world, governments have picked up," he said.
"They've never had to pay anything for it but they have in fact
undertaken to cover that risk because it then provides a greater
degree of certainty in a difficult market to insure the risks."
Dr Diesendorf says this is further evidence that nuclear energy
is not viable.
"That contradicts the claim that this is economic, because the
financial risk has to be part of the market process," he said.
"So what this is saying is that the Australian Government wants
to continue the same kind of subsidies to nuclear power that
have been given over the last few decades in the United States
and Britain.
"We're talking really about $US90 billion subsidy in the United
States over the last 50 years."
*****************************************************************
45 AU ABC: Nuclear power could 'damage' international relations.
06/06/2006. ABC News Online
Nuclear debate: Professor Lowe says Indonesia would see
Australia as a threat. [File photo] (Reuters)
A key critic of nuclear power says any push by the Federal
Government to expand the nuclear industry will threaten
Australia's neighbours and increase the risk of terrorism.
Federal Cabinet will consider the structure of a nuclear power
inquiry today.
Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says if nuclear power
has a future in Australia, it cannot rely on public funds.
"It wouldn't be expected that nuclear power would be something
that taxpayers in Australia would have to support, it would have
to stand on its own two feet economically," he said.
But scientist and Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF)
president Professor Ian Lowe says a greater concern is the
potential effect on Australia's neighbours.
"I think it has huge potential for damaging relations with
countries like Indonesia, who would see it as a direct threat,"
he said.
"I think our neighbours would inevitably be suspicious about
what our real motivations were and that would make us less
secure in the region."
Professor Lowe also says nuclear reactors would make the
country a greater target for terrorism.
A report by the nation's nuclear science agency says nuclear
power is cost-effective but the finding is based on government
covering much of the cost and liability of a nuclear power plant.
Inquiry make-up
The Prime Minister is under pressure to ensure an environmental
expert is part of the review.
Professor Lowe says he is wary of the make-up of the nuclear
inquiry.
"The inquiry has to have expertise in social and environmental
areas, as well as technical and economic," he said.
Mr Macfarlane has called on critics to wait for the inquiry.
"There's certainly no consideration by our Government of owning
or building power stations of any sort," he said.
Cabinet meets in Canberra this morning.
*****************************************************************
46 AU ABC: No list of possible nuclear sites, minister says.
06/06/2006. ABC News Online
Julie Bishop: What we need to do first is, let us have the
debate. (ABC TV)
No list of possible nuclear sites, minister says
The federal minister responsible for nuclear issues says that no
list has been drawn up of possible sites for nuclear power
stations.
Federal Cabinet will today examine a proposal for a
wide-ranging review of the nuclear cycle in Australia.
Over the weekend, Labor released a confidential government
document from 1997 with a list of possible sites for a nuclear
research reactor.
Science Minister Julie Bishop has told Channel Nine she is not
aware of an document with possible sites for nuclear power
stations.
"I'm not aware of any list having been drawn up for a nuclear
power site and so what we need to do first is, let's have the
debate, an objective dispassionate discussion about nuclear
power as an alternative source of energy," he said.
*****************************************************************
47 India: The Telegraph: More nuke plants in pipeline
Calcutta : Jamshedpur
June 06, 2006
OUR CORRESPONDENT
The press meet in progress at the Tata Steel press room in
Bistupur. Picture by Bhola Prasad
Jamshedpur, June 5: The future looks bright for the state’s
nuclear energy sector with more uranium projects in the
pipeline.
The country’s four uranium-related projects are all in Jharkhand
and it seems that a national target of 20,000 MW of power
generated by nuclear energy may be possible by 2020 because of a
recent memorandum of understanding signed with USA in the energy
sector.
Ramendra Gupta, chairman-cum-managing director (CMD) of Uranium
Corporation of India Limited (UCIL) has his work cut out for
him.
Speaking at the Press Club here, Gupta said the current national
output is 4020 MW. It is expected to increase to 10180 MW by
2011-12.
There are four uranium-related projects in the state at
Jadugoda, Bhatin, Narwapahar and Turmadih and a uranium process
plant at Jadugoda.
Other plans for the state include another process plant at
Turamadih and three more mines at Bandhurag, Bhagjata and
Mohuludih.
The process plant will be operational by the end of this year
and the three other mines will open by 2007, 2008 and 2010
respectively, Gupta said. The quality of uranium is, however, a
problem. The deposits in the country are of a lower grade than
those found in Australia and Canada. UCIL is working to rectify
this.
The CMD also spoke about the uses of nuclear energy. “It’s often
in the news for the wrong reasons,” he said, adding that nuclear
energy is used to cure cancer and is a source of power.
Copyright © 2006 The Telegraph. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
48 Guardian: Comment is free: The nuclear reaction
Never mind the hisses of dissent - as his appearance at Hay
proved, James Lovelock is in the business of telling us an
uncomfortable kind of truth.
John Harris
[Hay Festival] If Al Gore's eco-oratory at the Hay Festivalmixed
up apocalyptic warnings with the go-getting idea that we may yet
wake up and save ourselves, there have now come altogether
bleaker tidings, courtesy of Professor James Lovelock - inventor
of the Gaia hypothesis, and an incisive practitioner of the art
of telling people what they don't want to hear. "Humans will
survive," he told us. "They're tough. But civilization is
another matter."
His prognosis goes something like this. The human race has
probably left it far too late to avert climatic disaster, and
habitation of much of the world - sub-Saharan Africa, the more
arid parts of Asia - will eventually become a forlorn hope. In
that context, those who are lucky enough to live in northern
Europe will have to take the painful step of "stopping thinking
entirely globally" - a very chewy proposition, this, with
unpleasant augurs of a boon for the most dried-up kind of
isolationism - and think of themselves as the guardians of
metaphorical lifeboats, on which many of civilisation's hopes
will depend.
In this regard, the UK is particularly blessed: given that the
gulf stream keeps us around 8 degrees warmer than many
territories on a similar latitude, global warming's removal of
that meteorological crutch and a simulatenous upping of
temperatures will leave us - give or take increasingly volatile
weather - with our "comfortable, grumbly climate" just about
intact. Against that backdrop, self-sufficiency - in energy,
chiefly - will be imperative.
And then we hit the really difficult bit, for which Lovelock has
recently become quietly notorious. A secure domestic energy
supply, of necessity, will either depend on our surprisingly
bountiful though environmentally hazardous stock of coal, or a
revival of nuclear power - as he pointed out yesterday, "a very
viable alternative", with "so many lies told about it, it's
unbelievable".
About mid-way through his interview, we thus got to the beef:
ten minutes during which, in rapid succession, just about all
the bien-pensant myths about nuclear power and the supposedly
viable renewable alternatives - which, for reasons that have
always rather eluded me, have long been as much a part of the
bedrock of British liberal-left politics as any ideas about
equality, internationalism and all the rest - were calmly nixed.
The waste generated by nuclear power, he said, is "a tiny
quantity, relatively speaking" - vitrified, buried, in no way
volatile, and only hazardous if you fancy burrowing into the
earth and spending a lot of time sitting on it. Far more
worrying is the vast quantity of carbon dioxide waste that the
UK releases each year: roughly quantified, it's akin to a
mountain one mile high, with a 20 mile circumference. The
supposed dangers of radiation, he said, were eternally bound up
with the mistaken confusion of nuclear power with nuclear
weapons and the paranoid mindset of the Cold War.
Talking of which, the recurrent parading of the Chernobyl
accident as a counter-argument to a British nuclear revival are
so misplaced as to be downright laughable: that catastrophe was
the product of a reactor design and safety regime that were a
case study in Soviet incompetence; the creditable safety record
of the Western nuclear industry, by contrast, paints an
altogether more reassuring picture.
From there, he got a little more mischievous, and a lot more
blunt. Set against what their proponents claim they could
deliver, wind farms, he said, are "a joke", capable of
delivering only "a trivial amount of electricity". There is a
place for some renewable innovation: a hydro-electric barrage
across the River Severn, he claimed, would provide as much
electricity as four nuclear power stations (though, as I recall,
that project has recurrently been the focus of opposition from
environmental pressure groups), and in some northern European
countries, geo-thermal and hydro-electric power will satisfy the
population's energy needs. Britain, unfortunately, is not one of
them; for us, it's nuclear or bust.
Of course, the audience didn't much like this. From time to
time, there were murmurs, hisses and squawks of dissent. What
was most striking, though, was the flimsiness of the challenges
to Lovelock's arguments, and the sense that at least some of his
public were coming round to his way of thinking. With sighing
inevitability - and in the rather bizarre context of theories
that one of the 9/11 planes may actually have been headed for
Three Mile Island - one man asked Lovelock about the possible
consequences of terrorists flying a plane into a nuclear power
station, which was answered with a characteristically calm
explanation of the vast concrete shells that surround nuclear
reactors, and the fact that fatalities would thereby be limited
to the poor souls onboard (while we're here, that argument has
always struck me as being pretty specious: if the idea that
terrorists are set on crashing airliners into industrial
installations is to dictate our actions, why build chemical
plants, Buncefield-type fuel depots - or, given some compelling
recent evidence, very tall buildings?)
Given the extent of Lovelock's affinity with the green movement,
the whole spectacle rather suggested a patient being reluctantly
given the news of an illness, and a prescription for medication
that they'll simply have to take. Incidentally, towards the back
of the marquee there sat the shadow chancellor, George Osborne,
currently wedded to the switch a few lights off/carry on
building airports school of faux-greenery, and the sidekick of a
leader who has recently been making vague and pretty moronic
anti-nuclear noises. Was he listening? Somehow, I doubt it.
June 5, 2006 10:36 AM
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited
2006.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: 164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR
*****************************************************************
49 The Australian: Solar power 'part of nuclear debate' | |
This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP
Solar power 'part of nuclear debate'
June 05, 2006
ANY debate or inquiry into nuclear power should consider the
option of solar energy, a housing advisory group said today.
National building advisory service Archicentre said governments
around Australia should create a national research and solar
industry development fund of $1 billion to develop solar
technology and create jobs.
"Millions of hectares of rooftops exist in Australian suburbs
and industrial estates that should be productive fields of
efficient and non-polluting energy," Archicentre managing
director Robert Caulfield said.
He said this source of energy remained untapped because of the
failure of governments to focus on building a national solar
industry that could create a big export market with leading
technology.
"Australia as a country should be moving towards making every
home, via its roof and design, a net contributor to the
electricity grid.
"One of the things that mass-produced solar technology would
bring is affordability that would place clean solar energy
within the reach of everyone."
Mr Caulfield said that in 1995 solar power provided less than
one per cent of the energy used by Australian households.
He said that figure was forecast to rise to just 1.1 per cent
by 2010.
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
50 The Australian: Abbott OK with nuclear power | |
This story is from our network Source: AAP
June 05, 2006
FEDERAL Health Minister Tony Abbott said today he would have no
problems with a nuclear power plant in his electorate.
Mr Abbott said he had no views beyond the economic debate on
nuclear power in Australia.
He said if there was sufficient space for a nuclear power plant
in his electorate, which includes some of Sydney's northern
beaches, he would not oppose one being built there.
"If we had the space, I would not have any particular problem
with it," Mr Abbot said.
"(But) we would be flat out putting a wind farm in my
electorate, let alone a nuclear power plant."
Asked if nuclear power was good for people's health, Mr Abbott
said debating issues like the economics of nuclear power and the
location of nuclear plant sites was pragmatic.
"But beyond that, I don't really have any particular views," Mr
Abbott said.
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
51 The Australian: Cabinet to consider nuclear inquiry | |
This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP
By Maria Hawthorne, Miranda Korzy and David Crawshaw
June 05, 2006
FEDERAL Cabinet will take the first major step towards an
Australian nuclear industry tomorrow when it signs off on an
inquiry into the controversial power source.
Prime Minister John Howard will take a proposal to Cabinet for
a wide-ranging inquiry to be conducted by a panel of experts,
including chief scientist and nuclear supporter Jim Peacock.
But Mr Howard has refused to say where he thinks any potential
nuclear reactors should be located, after a scientific review
recommended at least three, and possibly five, nuclear power
plants would be required.
"I know there's going to be a fear campaign and people are
going to be running around saying rule out this site, rule out
that site," Mr Howard said.
"It's quite premature to be talking about sites, and in the end
if there's private sector investment involved in power stations,
if they do come about, then obviously the private sector
investors would have a little bit to say in relation to (the)
site."
Deputy Opposition Leader Jenny Macklin said potential locations
had to form part of the inquiry's terms of reference.
"If he's serious about having a debate about nuclear power, the
Australian people need to know where they're going to be," Ms
Macklin said. "Australians want to know whether or not it's
going to be safe. Australians want to know where they're going
to be."
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)
executive director Ian Smith said any nuclear power stations
would need to be near major cities or towns on the east coast,
where they could be easily hooked up to the electricity grid.
He said four or five nuclear plants would have to be built to
make an atomic energy industry viable.
"Because nuclear power produces large quantities of power, it
would need to be on the major grid," Dr Smith said on ABC radio.
"We're talking about ... the east coast is the major grid in
Australia."
An ANSTO report, released yesterday, found nuclear power would
be competitive with gas or coal-fired electricity – but only if
taxpayers helped pay for it or shouldered the risk of producing
it.
Dr Smith said he expected the upcoming inquiry to take about
six months.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, who has backed a
nuclear-powered desalination plant in his home state of South
Australia, said it was too early to begin discussing sites.
"What's the point of having a debate about a site if in the
end, having considered all these matters, that they turn out not
to be economically viable?" Mr Downer said on ABC radio.
NSW Premier Morris Iemma and Queensland Premier Peter Beattie
both say they will not accept a nuclear power station in their
state, while Victorian Energy Minister Theo Theophanous says
nuclear energy does not make sense.
But Mr Howard said he believed the states would react in a
"sensible fashion" if the inquiry recommended a move to nuclear
power.
© The Australian
*****************************************************************
52 FW: TMI Health Shadow
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 14:32:18 -0700
The shadow lingers
Ten years after lawsuit dismissed, debate continues on partial meltdown's
health effects
By JENNIFER NEJMAN
Daily Record/Sunday News
Lester Haring, 62, holds his granddaughter Lindsey Keiser, 5, at his
Christmas tree farm along River Drive in Cly. Behind him is the Susquehanna
River and the cooling towers for the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant.
Lester Haring, who worked at the plant for several years, said he has no
qualms about living nearby.
· E-mail photo
· Order photo reprint
(Jason Plotkin - YDR)
At bottom: · The health effect studies · Scientists test teeth for TMI's
effects
Jun 4, 2006 ‹ Ten years ago a judge ruled there was insufficient evidence to
link radiation from the Three Mile Island accident to health problems in
test cases of about 2,000 plaintiffs.
Yet some people who co-exist with the operating nuclear plant continue to
question whether the partial meltdown on March 28, 1979, released radiation
into the environment that has affected their health.
They live in the historical shadow of a plant that suffered a partial
meltdown, the worst nuclear accident in United States history.
Today is the 10-year anniversary of U.S. District Judge Sylvia H. Rambo's
ruling. The rest of the plaintiffs lost on appeal in 2002.
Nearly everything about the accident seems to be up for dispute, depending
on who you ask, from how much radiation left the plant, to where it
traveled, to what groups of people might have been affected, to what, if
any, health effects have occurred or might occur in the future.
Even scientific studies seem to conflict. Some find links to health
problems. Others do not. A new analysis notes more-than-expected cases of
thyroid cancer in York and Lancaster counties over a period of years and
pro- poses - but doesn't conclude - that it could be because of exposure to
radiation from the accident.
For some, questions linger
Within a year of the accident, a German shepherd developed cataracts and a
cat gave birth to a litter of deformed kittens, Debbie Baker said. The pets
belonged to her mother, who lived about five miles from the plant.
In 1980, Baker gave birth to Bradley. As a 23-year-old Fairview Township
mother with a son who had Down syndrome, Baker's thoughts turned to
radiation exposure.
Before they evacuated, Baker had been taking her daughter to a babysitter in
Goldsboro - not knowing she was pregnant with her second child.
Baker joined a class action lawsuit and wanted a day in court, but
eventually accepted a monetary settlement. That settlement was accepted
before the about 2,000 other plaintiffs brought suit, she said.
Today, at 49, in her Camp Hill home, Baker has a radiation monitor. It's
never reached a level that would convince her to evacuate. She said she
doesn't live in fear, but remains concerned about whether what happened that
day affected her unborn child.
"It's always - like a wonder - you can't ever prove it," Baker said.
James E. Thomas, now 76, was one of the about 2,000 plaintiffs. Janet and
James Thomas left their Foustown home the weekend of the accident to travel
to the Appalachian Mountains for a square-dancing festival. With other
dancers, they joked about glowing in the dark.
Then, James Thomas, who loved to be outside gardening, developed skin
cancer.
When the lawsuit ended, the Thomases gave up.
"We just figured it was a lost cause and let it drop," Janet Thomas said.
Today, the couple lives in the same house.
For some, no worries
On a recent May day, the Susquehanna River sparkled blue. On Cly Road in
Newberry Township sits a quaint house with a small sign advertising "FRESH
BROWN EGGS."
Margaret Sipe, 55, and her husband have lived in the house with a view of
the cooling towers for about two decades. She believes people have blown the
accident out of proportion.
"I like it out here," Sipe said. "Not a lot of traffic, everyone gets
along."
The area has filled in with more residential housing - about eight years
ago, those places behind her house were cornfields, Sipe said.
The family has a friend who works at the nuclear power plant. There are no
problems, don't worry, he has told them.
"It doesn't even cross our mind," Sipe said.
Up River Drive, the street rises with a steep hill. The tree farm lot
provides a view of white puffs billowing out of the cooling towers.
Lester and Sue Haring own Haring Tree Farms.
The same year as the accident, but after it occurred, they started their
Christmas tree farm on River Drive in Cly. They live nearby.
"The condition of the land is fine," Sue Haring said.
Lester Haring, 62, grows corn, tomatoes, onions, potatoes and other
vegetables with his grandchildren. They sell some. His granddaughter, Dr.
Roger Levin, a head and neck surgeon in the Harrisburg area, in the
examining room of his Palmyra office May 25 with a model head and neck and a
model thyroid. Levin recently completed a professional paper and found
higher-than-expected cases in York and Lancaster counties.
· E-mail photo
· Order photo reprint
(Kristin Murphy - YDR) Lindsey Keiser, 5, is in charge of pumpkins - she's
low to the ground, that's good for planting, he tells her.
Haring was not working at Three Mile Island the day of the accident, but he
worked there for nine years building scaffolding inside the plant.
Builders were the first ones to enter areas where updates or repairs were
needed because they created the structures electricians and others needed to
stand on, he said.
Lester Haring said he believes nuclear plants are safe.
His wife, Sue, 61, has breast cancer. She's taken radiation and
chemotherapy. She said she believes she inherited her disease; both her
grandmother and two aunts had breast cancer.
"People have cancer all over the United States," Sue Haring said. "It's
really hard to say did (the accident) do it."
Researchers debate: No link
Scientific studies on the Three Mile Island accident have different
conclusions. Some people even interpret them differently.
By the time Columbia University investigators published their findings in
1990 that they saw no link between radiation and cancer cases, the lawsuit
of about 2,000 plaintiffs was under way.
The state Department of Health also performed studies. None showed an
increased risk of cancer related to the Three Mile Island accident, said
Richard McGarvey, health department spokesman.
One health study showed a higher risk of low-birth weight babies in women
who lived within a 10-mile-radius, but that was determined to be associated
with a higher use of sedatives that appeared to be associated with the
stress pregnant women were feeling, McGarvey said.
Until the mid-1980s, the state health department updated a registry of
35,000 people who lived within a 10-mile-radius of Three Mile Island,
McGarvey said.
Another registry of women pregnant at the time of the accident and the
children they bore was updated through the state fiscal year of 1994-95, he
said. Nothing unusual was showing up in the database, so the registry was
cut out of the budget, McGarvey said.
Detailed studies of radiological consequences of the Three Mile Island
accident were done by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the
Environmental Protection Agency, what is now the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Energy and Pennsylvania,
according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The average radiation dose to people living within 10 miles of the plant was
8 millirem, and any single person would have received less than 100
millirem, according to the American Nuclear Society.
Most people receive about 5 millirem per week from the environment. A chest
X-ray exposes a person to about 6 millirem, according to the society.
Studies have shown that radiation's immediate effects are not observed until
35,000 millirem, said Brian Grimes, who retired from the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission in 1996 and is a spokesman for the nuclear society.
At 15,000 millirem, temporary sterility in humans is clinically testable,
Grimes said.
Studies from Three Mile Island did not find any statistically significant
increases in cancer cases, he said.
Attorney Alfred Wilcox of Pepper Hamilton LLP in Philadelphia represented
the three power companies and their parent company, GPU, that the about
2,000 plaintiffs sued. Rambo's decision should give comfort to anyone
concerned that the radiation adversely affected their health, Wilcox said.
The plaintiffs' case fell apart with their complicated theory that a blowout
of radiation from the reactor avoided all of the detection monitors and huge
doses hit pine and spruce trees and people, Wilcox said.
"We showed the judge, actually, those trees were affected by a tree fungus
and parasite," he said.
He said there are more important subjects to spend research money on than
whether the Three Mile Island accident had any health effects.
"The idea that somebody would do a better job of looking at that today is
kind of silly," he said.
Others say the accident presents a unique opportunity for continued study.
Evelyn Talbott, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Pittsburgh,
said that, even though exposures during the accident were low, the
population should continue to be followed. That might be possible using the
state health department's cancer registry, she said.
In one of her studies, a 20-year follow-up of mortality, published in 2003,
Talbott used information from the Sue Haring, 61, has breast cancer. She
lived near the plant in 1979 when the accident occurred. She remembered
evacuating, but later returned. She doesn't believe her cancer was caused by
the accident. Cancer runs in her family, she said. Her husband, Lester,
stands in the background.
· E-mail photo
· Order photo reprint
(Jason Plotkin - YDR) state's registry for residents who lived within a
five-mile radius of Three Mile Island, combined with the state's mortality
data. The study found radioactivity released during the nuclear accident did
not appear to have caused more cancer deaths in residents between 1979 and
1998, Talbott said.
It did find a hint of higher breast cancer rates, likely caused by gamma
exposure in the days after the accident, but that trend appeared to weaken
between the 1992 and 1998 study updates, she said.
Researchers debate: Possible link
Other researchers have found what they say are links between radiation
released and cancer.
Steve Wing, who conducted a study on behalf of the about 2,000 plaintiffs,
said his research improved upon the Columbia study, but produced different
results.
Wing, associate professor in the epidemiology department at the University
of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, found as the estimated radiation dose
increased, the cancer incidence increased after the accident, based on where
plumes from the accident traveled.
His researchers looked at the difference between the pre-accident period,
1976 to 1979, compared to two sets of years post-accident, 1984 to 1985 and
1981 to 1985.
They found positive relationships between accident dose estimates and cancer
rates for leukemia, lung cancer and all cancers combined.
"The criticisms were mainly that we weren't supposed to find that," he said.
Study data was available to nuclear industry scientists, and researchers had
the opportunity to point out mistakes, but none did, he said.
When Rambo decided 10 years ago not to include some of the study data and
then the plaintiffs' appeal lost, Wing said he was disappointed.
"I feel it was a disservice to the general public," he said. "It's a
disservice to the history of this accident. ... Our interpretation of the
results is that the doses were larger than what had been assumed."
In reviewing state Department of Health data, a Harrisburg-area doctor found
more thyroid cancer cases than expected in York County for every year except
one between 1990 and 2002.
Dr. Roger Levin, a head and neck surgeon who has experience treating thyroid
cancer, said one reason for the higher incidence of thyroid cancer could be
that people were exposed to radiation during the TMI accident.
The thyroid - a gland in the neck - controls the body's overall metabolism.
It manages weight, pulse rate and body temperature.
Because the thyroid needs iodine to make its hormone, it's possible the
gland could have taken in more radioactive iodine during the accident, Levin
said. The gland cannot distinguish between radioactive iodine and the type
found in table salt, which is why the state passes out non-radioactive
iodine pills. In theory, people could take the pills during a nuclear
accident to fill up the gland to protect it.
Addressing the increased cases in York and Lancaster counties, Levin said,
radioactive material could have traveled to those counties by water, since
it seems the wind was not blowing in that direction during the accident and
days after.
When Levin started his research, he expected to see no difference in the
number of thyroid cancer cases expected and the number reported in area
counties.
Counties farther away than York and Lancaster from the accident showed no
increasing trend.
"I sort of don't know what to do with the data except throw it out there and
let (people) smarter than me debate it," Levin said.
Continuing to wonder
Donna James, 46, of West York said she believes the Three Mile Island
accident caused her thyroid cancer. At the time, she was a student at Lock
Haven University of Pennsylvania.
In January 2004, after three years of feeling tired and achy, James had a
nodule removed from her neck. Her mother has thyroid problems, but not
cancer, James said.
James said her cancer could have a connection to breathing the air after the
accident or from the effects the radiation had on the environment.
"Especially because I used to eat a lot of organic foods," James said.
Her concerns and wonders have become part of the shadow Three Mile Island
has left on the region.
Rep. Bruce Smith, R-Dillsburg, said people still talk to him about the
accident. They tell him they believe there are higher cancer rates in the
area because of it, he said.
"There is no doubt in my mind the (health department's) studies were
flawed," Smith said.
At the time of the accident, Smith was chairman of the board in Newberry
Township, the largest municipality on the West Shore within a 5-mile radius
of the plant.
His children stood outside at the bus stop that morning. After the accident,
his wife, Patricia Smith, became active in the fight to make sure the plant
was safe. When one unit re-opened in 1985, the Smiths moved to Dillsburg.
They placed 22 miles between their home and the reactors. No longer could
they see the cooling towers from their home.
"(The tower) was too much of a reminder of the accident and mental turmoil
and frustration my wife went through at the time of the accident," Smith
said.
When asked to comment about the 25th anniversary in 2004, a FirstEnergy
spokesman said that, since the 1979 partial meltdown, the Unit 2 reactor has
been in a state of long-term monitored storage.
GPU workers removed 300,000 pounds of core material from TMI Unit 2 before
the project was completed in December 1993.
A FirstEnergy spokesman said last week the company could not comment on
possible health effects because it did not own TMI Unit 2 at the time of the
accident.
For some, the plant is part of the scenery. For others, it's a symbol of
hidden effects of a past event and clues to why certain people got sick.
Eric Epstein of Three Mile Island Alert Inc., an activist group formed
before the 1979 accident, said he believes people affected by the radiation
will get a day in court, even if it's decades from now. Epstein is convinced
that the accident has led to adverse health effects in the area, but he
still lives there.
It's a great place to live, he said. "There is nowhere you can go where
there is not an environmental threat," Epstein said.
They monitor the radiation and watch.
"People will question the health effects of TMI for at least a generation,"
he said.
Reach Jennifer Nejman at 771-2026 or jnejman@ydr.com.
The health effect studies
The following studies deal with Three Mile Island:
· Steve Wing, associate professor, epidemiology department, UNC, Chapel Hill
The study was conducted on behalf of the about 2,000 plaintiffs who claimed
emissions of radioactive gases during the Three Mile Island accident were
much larger than the industry and government stated and that intense plumes
had exposed small areas to high radiation doses, resulting in adverse health
effects, including cancer.
Findings: Wing's research found positive relationships between accident dose
estimates and cancer rates for leukemia, lung cancer and all cancers
combined. The study looked at the difference between the pre-accident
period, 1976 to 1979, compared with two sets of years post-accident, 1984 to
1985, and 1981 to 1985.
Estimates for radiation effects were larger for cancers that occurred in
1984 to 1985 than for cancers that occurred in 1981 to 1985, an observation
consistent with there being more time for cancers to develop after exposure.
Those estimates were larger when statistical adjustments were made for
differences in socioeconomic status between areas of low and high dose.
· Evelyn Talbott, professor of epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh,
Graduate School of Public Health
Talbott's 2003 study was a 20-year follow-up of mortality data on residents
who lived within a 5-mile radius of Three Mile Island. She used data
collected by the state Department of Health in interviews conducted with
32,135 residents within two months of the accident. The exposure data was
combined with mortality data from the state.
Finding:The study found overall cancer deaths in the local population were
similar to cancer death rates statewide. Radioactivity released during the
nuclear accident does not appear to have caused more cancer deaths in
residents between 1979 and 1998, she said.
However, with regard to specific cancer sites, the risk of cancers of the
hematopoietic blood system, such as leukemias and lymphomas, were greater
for naturally occurring radiation, called background radiation, that comes
from the earth's crust.
There is an area around Three Mile Island that has this higher background
radiation and should be considered for further study, Talbott said. The area
is known as the Reading Prong and it occurs in southeastern Pennsylvania in
the southern parts of Lebanon, Berks, Lehigh and Northampton counties.
Talbott cautioned that more work should be done before conclusions can be
made about this area.
Talbott's study found a hint of higher breast cancer rates, likely caused by
gamma exposure the days after the accident, but this trend appeared to
weaken between the 1992 and 1998 study updates.
· Dr. Roger Levin,chief division of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery,
PinnacleHealth System in Harrisburg, and clinical associate professor of
surgery, Penn State College of Medicine
Levin did his research so he could join The Triological Society, a society
for ear, nose and throat specialists and head and neck surgeons. His paper
is scheduled to be published in the society's peer-reviewed journal, The
Laryngoscope, in an upcoming month.
Findings: In reviewing state health data, Levin found more thyroid cancer
cases than expected in York County for every year except one between 1995
and 2002.
One plausible reason could be people were exposed to radiation during the
1979 Three Mile Island accident, he said.
During the accident, the thyroid gland could have taken in radioactive
iodine or people could have brought increased levels into their systems
through food grown in the area or other environmental factors, he said.
Levin said two factors that could have made a link to the Three Mile Island
accident more convincing did not occur: the winds were blowing northwest,
not toward York County, and there was no increase in thyroid cancer in
populations younger than 20 years old.
However, he said he found in his readings that a small amount of radiation
was vented into the Susquehanna River in the form of wastewater from parts
of the plant that were not part of the cooling systems, such as toilets,
showers and laundry facilities.
And children and expectant mothers were evacuated in the days following the
accident, Levin said.
Thyroid cancer is increasing in the United States. Some say it's due to
better diagnosis; others attribute exposure to radiation, Levin said.
top
Scientists test teeth for TMI's effects
Pa. group looks for radioactive chemicals from nuclear sites
Joseph Mangano wants your baby teeth.
Not for the same sentimental reasons parents safeguard their children's
teeth as childhood keepsakes, but rather to try to prove what he believes
are the dangers of living close to a nuclear reactor.
Since 1998, the Radiation and Public Health Project in Norristown has
collected more than 5,000 teeth from people who live close to one of the
eight U.S. nuclear sites, and from people who don't live near the sites,
Mangano said.
In November, the Radiation and Public Health Project added Three Mile Island
in Dauphin County to its list of nuclear sites and started to collect teeth
from nearby residents, he said.
Mangano is the national coordinator for the Radiation and Public Health
Project.
Through the project, several dozen teeth have been collected from people who
live near TMI. The teeth will be tested for levels of Strontium-90, a
radioactive chemical found in the waste of nuclear reactors that has been
linked to bone cancer, cancer of the soft tissue near the bone and leukemia.
Strontium-90 may also contaminate reactor parts and fluids, according to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
A decade has passed since U.S. Middle District Chief Judge Sylvia Rambo
dismissed 2,100 cases filed by people who claimed their health problems
could be traced back to the partial meltdown of TMI Unit 2 on March 28,
1979.
"To me," Mangano said, "the health effects (related to the partial meltdown)
are almost as big as the story of the accident itself."
On that day, mechanical failure and human oversight led to what is
considered the worst commercial nuclear accident in American history.
As a result of the partial meltdown, people who lived near the plant at the
time of the accident were exposed to a small amount of radioactive material.
The goal of Mangano's group is to collect baby teeth from before and after
the TMI Unit 2 accident to test for the Strontium-90 levels.
Launched in 1985 by founders Jay Gould and Ernest Sternglass, the project's
goals, according to Mangano, are:
· To account for any health risks posed by nuclear reactors.
· To point out any resistance by government officials to fully disclose the
health effects of nuclear power.
Mangano, 50, has a master's degree in public health, with a focus on disease
prevention, from the University of North Carolina.
He joined the Radiation and Public Health Project in 1989.
"I had a desire to contribute to preventive health," he said. "Especially
since our health system is so strongly focused on disease diagnosis and
treatment, and not on prevention."
Mangano regularly attends public hearings concerning nuclear power plants,
including Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, to raise public awareness about
the health effects of nuclear reactors.
The collection of teeth by the project is one way to alert the public to any
health risks posed by nuclear sites, Mangano said.
Aside from the area around TMI, the project has collected teeth from Indian
Point in New York, Oyster Creek in New Jersey, Limerick in Pennsylvania,
Saint Lucie in Florida, Turkey Point in Florida, Diablo Canyon in California
and Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York.
Roughly 80 percent of the teeth collected came from people who live close to
one of those sites.
By testing baby teeth, researchers with the project have found that people
who live close to nuclear sites have ingested high amounts of Strontium-90.
Children who live in counties closest to nuclear reactors have an average
level of Strontium-90 in their teeth that is 30 to 50 percent higher than
children tested in more distant counties.
While some people may inhale trace amounts of Strontium-90 as dust, the most
common pathway would be for residents to swallow the chemical via food and
water.
Strontium-90 is a byproduct found in the fission of uranium. During the
1950s and 1960s, large amounts of Strontium-90 were produced during
atmospheric nuclear weapons tests and dispersed worldwide, according to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Between 1998 and 2003, the Radiation and Public Health Project received 106
baby teeth from children with cancer. The group tested the teeth for
Strontium-90.
Since some of those teeth were very small or decayed, leaving little intact
enamel for testing, accurate test results were available for little more
than half of the samples.
Test results showed that the 54 teeth had an average Strontium-90
concentration about 60 percent higher than teeth from children without
cancer.
By the end of the year, Mangano's group plans to announce its test results
regarding baby teeth taken from residents who live close to TMI.
"We will take any baby teeth from anybody, but most of the teeth we are
collecting come from now," he said. "We would like to get more teeth from
people who were born before the accident so we can compare."
Reach Sean Adkins at 771-2047 or sadkins@ydr.com.
top
RETURN TO TOP
Main News >>
MORE MAIN NEWS >> HEADLINES
* Prison escapee captured
* Many have cleaned up after George Havens
* Constable: Havens ditched crutches during escape
* Postage from the past
* The shadow lingers
News · Local · Sports · Business · Living · Opinion · Photos
Jobs at the York Daily Record · Contact us · Submit Web site feedback
Copyright © York Daily Record
1891 Loucks Road
York, PA 17404, (717) 771-2000
Privacy Policy | MNG Corporate Site Map
*****************************************************************
53 New York Times: Indian-Americans Test Their Clout on Atom Pact -
By MIKE McINTIRE Published: June 5, 2006
Indian-Americans have mounted an intensive drive to support
President Bush's plan to aid India'scivilian nuclear program,
spending heavily on lobbying, campaign contributions and public
relations to persuade Congress to approve the deal.
Linda Spillers for The New York Times
Sanjay Puri, chairman of a political action group, wants a
nuclear deal between the U.S. and India.
Officials in Washington and New Delhi have called the agreement
historic, a centerpiece of American-Indian relations. But to
many Indian-Americans, the plan is something more personal: a
confirmation of India's emergence as a global power. And they
see the increasingly contentious battle in Congress as a unique
opportunity to demonstrate their budding political influence in
their adopted homeland.
Indian-Americans, a small but fast-growing, affluent and
well-educated group, are not new to lobbying in Washington. But
the proposed nuclear pact has energized them like nothing
before. In recent months, Indian-Americans, as well as the
Indian government in some cases, have invested heavily in proven
political tools that have helped previous immigrant groups break
into American politics — hiring lobbyists, organizing
fund-raisers and blanketing Capitol Hill with briefings, phone
calls and petitions.
"This is the chance to show that the community has matured and
can translate that into political effectiveness," said Sanjay
Puri, an information technology executive who is chairman of the
U.S.-India Political Action Committee, or Usinpac, one of
several Indian-American political groups that are working on the
issue.
Much of the lobbying has focused on lawmakers from the New York
metropolitan region, home to the highest concentration of
Indian-Americans in the country. Mr. Puri's group, for instance,
is organizing a fund-raiser this month for Senator Hillary
Rodham Clinton, whose support is viewed by Indian-American
leaders as crucial to winning broader Democratic backing for the
plan, Indian-American activists said.
Mrs. Clinton, co-chairwoman of the Senate's 39-member India
Caucus, has not taken a position on the deal.
The plan, hammered out last year by officials in Washington and
New Delhi and announced by President Bush during a visit to
India in March, would end a moratorium on sales of nuclear fuel
and reactor components to India's civilian nuclear program.
The Bush administration is now pushing for approval in
Congress, where a vote is not expected until at least the fall
and the outcome is far from certain. Some lawmakers have
asserted that the White House should have brought Congress into
the loop earlier before striking a deal with India, and the
president's low poll numbers have made Republicans less willing
to embrace the issue in an election year.
Even reliable allies of the administration, like Senator Richard
Lugar, a Republican of Indiana who is chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, have expressed concern that it will
undermine the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Critics of the
proposal say it could encourage rogue nations to pursue nuclear
arsenals and would set a particularly bad precedent in light of
the administration's effort to rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions.
India, which has nuclear weapons, has not signed the treaty and
would not be required to under the new agreement.
Under the proposal, India, whose nuclear reactors are controlled
by the military, would place most of its nuclear reactors under
civilian control, thereby opening them up to international
inspection. About a third of the reactors would remain
controlled by the military and beyond inspection.
Some Indian-Americans have also questioned whether Indian
immigrants should be putting so much of their political energy
into fighting for the contentious proposal. Rohit Tripathi, an
electrical engineer in Maryland and president of Young India, a
policy group, said that although he did not oppose the deal, he
was doubtful it would provide meaningful energy independence for
India.
"I think when an immigrant community wants to assimilate
themselves into the political process," he said, "they latch
onto whatever they can find." But the Indian-American community
has not always been very effective, political analysts and
Indian-Americans say, often content with photo opportunities and
lunch invitations with politicians rather than victories on
issues like immigrationor trade policies.
But the campaign for the nuclear deal has been far more
aggressive and focused, those people say. And though
Indian-American groups say they are not being directed by the
Bush administration or the Indian government, they have
consulted with representatives from both on how to lobby
Congress.
By contrast, Pakistani-Americans have not been as visible a
presence lobbying against the deal, Congressional officials
said.
To help overcome opposition in Congress, the Indian government
has signed contracts worth $1.3 million with influential
Washington lobbyists, including Robert D. Blackwill, a former
American ambassador to India for the Bush administration. The
Indian government has also retained former Senator Birch Bayh of
Indiana.
Foreign governments and individuals are barred from making
campaign contributions. But that is not the case for
American-based organizations like Usinpac, which is financed
largely by donations from wealthy Indian-American doctors,
engineers and other professionals, and has contributed more than
$200,000 to Congressional candidates over the last few years.
Usinpac alone has hosted nine fund-raisers and receptions since
January, raising tens of thousands of dollars for key members of
Congress.
In addition, the United States-India Business Council and Indian
American Friendship Council are also lobbying on the nuclear
issue, and wealthy Indian-Americans are holding fund-raisers for
members of Congress. Getting the issue approved is "a huge deal"
for the Indian-American community, said Representative Gary
Ackerman, a New York Democrat who is co-chairman of the House
Caucus on India and Indian-Americans and supports the deal.
"They're tripping all over each other to get behind this," he
said of Indian-Americans who have been lobbying Congress on the
issue. "On a scale of 10, this is probably a 15 for them."
The delegation from the New York metropolitan area - home to
nearly a quarter, or 400,000, of the nation's 1.7 million
Indian-Americans - has been a reliable pro-Indian voice in
Congress since the 1980's.
That is when Representative Stephen J. Solarz, a Brooklyn
Democrat, became the first to aggressively court what had been a
largely overlooked Indian-American immigrant community. Mr.
Solarz helped establish a South Asia bureau in the State
Department, made himself an expert on U.S.-Indian relations and
lobbied for the Indian government after he left office in 1993.
By 1994, Indian-Americans had raised their political profile
enough that House members formed the India Caucus, led by
Representative Frank Pallone, a Democrat from New Jersey.
Although Indian-Americans have contributed heavily to both
Democrats and Republicans, they have tended to favor Republicans,
giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to President Bush's
campaign in 2004. That year, Bobby Jindal, a Republican from
Louisiana, became the first Indian-American elected to Congress
in almost 50 years.
Many Indian-Americans have enthusiastically embraced political
activity in part "because such opportunities were not always
available in India," said Kapil Sharma, a former legislative
assistant to Mr. Pallone who helped organize the House India
caucus.
Clearly, analysts say, the nuclear deal is raising expectations
among the group that it can directly affect American politics in
a major way.
Still, some political analysts, and even some Indian-Americans,
say that the community has picked a risky issue on which to stake
its claim to maturity. The India caucuses in Congress are openly
divided on the merits of the nuclear deal, and opponents of it,
including nuclear nonproliferation advocates and members of the
smaller Pakistan caucus in Congress, are making their voices
heard.
"It is clearly the most important issue that the community has
grappled with," said Robert Hathaway, director of the Asia
program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
in Washington. "It has a higher visibility. If they lose, the
community itself will take a larger hit in terms of the
assessment of its effectiveness."
Copyright 2006The New York Times Company
*****************************************************************
54 NRC: NRC Proposes Changes to Regulations on Occupational Radiation Dose Records, Total Dose
Definition
News Release - 2006-07 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office
of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC
20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 06-079 June 5, 2006
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering amending
several regulations dealing with radiation doses to workers at
licensed facilities.
The first proposed change would relieve NRC license holders of
the requirement to automatically provide annual dose reports to
workers who received less than 100 millirem (mrem) of total dose
or less than 100 mrem to any individual organ or tissue in the
previous year. Licensees would still be required to provide dose
records to those categories of workers upon request. The 100
mrem limit was selected because it is also the threshold dose
for licensees to instruct workers on radiation protection.
The second proposed change would revise the definition of total
effective dose equivalent, which is meant to ensure both
external and internal exposure to radiation is taken into
account. The proposed change would allow licensees to improve
their assessment of the risk arising from work-related radiation
exposures.
The third proposed change would revise how commercial nuclear
power plant licensees should label containers holding
radioactive materials in posted areas. The change would allow
those licensees to mark the containers according to their
radiological hazard instead of giving more detailed information,
as long as the containers are only handled by workers trained to
minimize any radiation exposure.
The final proposed change would eliminate the requirement for
licensees to try and obtain lifetime dose records for every
worker who requires monitoring. Licensees are no longer required
to obtain lifetime records to evaluate occupational doses in a
given monitoring year. The only occasion where lifetime dose
records would be required is when a licensee authorizes a
planned special exposure for an adult worker.
Comments on the revised proposed rule will be accepted for 75
days following publication in the Federal Register. Comments may
be mailed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications
Staff. Comments may also be e-mailed to SECY@nrc.govor online
via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Last revised Monday, June 05, 2006
*****************************************************************
55 ICT: 'Divine Strake' detonation halted
[2006/06/05]
Posted: June 05, 2006
by: Brenda Norrell / Indian Country Today
Photo courtesy Deanna Taylor -- Western Shoshone and
members of the American Indian Movement of Colorado, Tonatierra
and the Indigenous Environmental Network, joined by other
supporters, continued their protest of the ''Divine Strake''
detonation at the Nevada Test Site over Memorial Day weekend.
The detonation has been halted. Some 45 people were arrested
after they crossed the boundary onto the test site. The group is
calling for a return to the sacred on aboriginal Western
Shoshone land at the Nevada Test Site.
Carrie Dann arrested at Nevada Test Site
MERCURY, Nev. - The ''Divine Strake'' detonation has been halted,
but Western Shoshone continued their protest at the Nevada Test
Site over Memorial Day weekend to demand respect for Western
Shoshone land rights at the site, as stated in the Treaty of Ruby
Valley of 1863.
Carrie Dann, Western Shoshone grandmother, was among 45
people arrested after they crossed the boundary onto the Nevada
Test Site in an act of civil disobedience. Security from the site
and Nye County sheriff's deputies arrested them and placed them
in a holding facility.
''Enough is enough,'' Dann told the crowd before being
arrested, which resounded the ''Ya basta!'' (''Enough is
enough!'') battle cry of the Zapatistas fighting for indigenous
rights in Mexico.
Glenn Morris, attorney, university professor and member
of the Colorado Chapter of the American Indian Movement, was
arrested. Morris told officers that they were in violation of the
Treaty of Ruby Valley and the U.S. Constitution.
''This is treaty land,'' said several Western Shoshone as
they were arrested. Non-Western Shoshone received permits to be
on the land from the Western Shoshone Nation Council.
Julie Fishel, attorney and advocate for the Western
Shoshone Defense Council, and Steven Newcomb, Indian Country
Today columnist, were among the 30 women and 15 men arrested.
The women formed a circle in the detention area and sang
a warrior song, receiving applause from some officers.
''It doesn't have to be hostile, it can be done in a good
way,'' Fishel told Indian Country Today. She said it was the
first time she was arrested and as an attorney considered the
choice carefully. She said her decision was based on the
lawlessness in this country and the United States' refusal to
honor decisions of the United Nations, while continuing to
violate Western Shoshone and indigenous human rights.
Western Shoshone spiritual leader Corbin Harney, Tom
Goldtooth, of the Indigenous Environmental Network, and Tupac
Enrique, of Tonatierra in Phoenix, led the day's events, which
centered on tradition and respect for mother earth. Several
hundred people attended the protest and march to the Nevada Test
Site. The 45 arrested were cited and released.
The 700-ton explosion named Divine Strake was halted
after Western Shoshone filed a lawsuit in federal court and 42
national and international organizations joined forces, including
environmental justice, environmental, political, nonproliferation
activists, peace activists and indigenous groups.
The ''Not so Divine Strake Protest'' turned into a
victory celebration for Western Shoshone, environmental activists
and downwinders May 28 at the Nevada Test Site. Downwinders,
those who could be affected by the release of radioactive
particles from previous blasts, celebrated in Western states
including Utah, Idaho and Montana.
''Now, we'll call it a victory party,'' said Peggy Maze
Johnson, executive director of Citizen Alert, the Nevada-based
environmental justice organization.
The Nevada Site Office of the National Nuclear Security
Administration announced it would withdraw its Finding of No
Significant Impact related to the environmental assessment.
''This action is being taken to clarify and provide further
information regarding background levels of radiation from global
fallout in the vicinity of the Divine Strake experiment.
Atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons by several countries in
the 1950s and 1960s resulted in the dispersion of radioactive
fallout throughout the northern hemisphere,'' the NNSA said.
Attorney Robert Hager earlier assembled a national and
international team of attorneys and professionals who filed
affidavits on behalf of Western Shoshone plaintiffs to halt it.
''We owe so much to these people, who have such incredible
knowledge that when the government saw the strength of their
credentials, [it] blinked,'' Hager said.
Two Western Shoshone tribes and individual Western Shoshone
Indians and downwinders from Nevada and Utah asked a federal
judge in Las Vegas for a second time to stop the huge
aboveground explosion. The blast was first scheduled for June 2,
then cancelled and rescheduled for June 23 after the lawsuit was
filed on April 20.
Radioactive fallout from the blast was predicted that
would result in cancers. Children were the most likely victims.
Experts filing documents in the case include Dr. Thomas
Fasy, member of the executive committee of the New York City
Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, and Richard
Miller, a toxic exposures expert from Houston, who authored the
five-volume U.S. Atlas of Nuclear Fallout, according to a written
statement by the plaintiffs.
Fasy wrote that ''to a reasonable degree of medical and
scientific certainty ... the Divine Strake explosion would
disperse large amounts of radioactive particles into the
atmosphere.''
He stated that millions of citizens living downwind are
at risk of inhaling particles.
''It is virtually certain that this inhalation of
radioactive particles would result in an increased frequency of a
variety of cancers in the exposed populations,'' Fasy said.
''Moreover, the increased risk of developing cancers would be
borne disproportionately by the children living downwind.''
Miller described the Department of Energy's
''insufficient research regarding the health effects of many of
the potential radioisotopes possibly buried in the soil that may
be entrained in the dust cloud as a result of the Divine Strake
event.''
Miller and Fasy warn that entire communities may be
exposed to radioisotopes, including alpha emitters such as
americium-241 - an acknowledged carcinogen.
Hager also asked federal District Judge Lloyd George to
find that the planned blast would violate the international
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the congressional ban on the
development of new nuclear weapons.
John Burroughs, executive director of the New York
City-based Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, filed a
declaration in support.
Burroughs said the Divine Strake test ''reflects a
doctrine of war fighting in which nuclear weapons could be used
first, against states not possessing nuclear weapons, in an
integrated fashion with non-nuclear forces.''
Burroughs said this ''is wholly inconsistent with a
'diminishing role for nuclear weapons in security policies'
agreed by the United States in 2000 and a central element of
compliance with the disarmament obligation.''
Hager criticized Bechtel, of Nevada, and the federal
Departments of Defense and Energy for ''procedural genuflection''
by filing papers in a thinly disguised attempt to comply with
environmental administrative procedures.
Hager claimed that the government agencies and Bechtel
have engaged in ''junk science'' and have ''intentionally
failed'' to conduct proper sampling of the soil, and has asked
the court to halt any further ''testing'' by Bechtel and
government agencies based on alleged conflict of interest.
Nye County Sheriff's Office officials did not return
phone calls for comment by press time.
© 1998 - 2006 Indian Country Today. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
56 KRNV.com: Tribal leaders lead protest Nevada Test Site's `Divine Strake'
Channel 4
Protesters took to the streets of downtown Reno Saturday to keep
a "mushroom cloud" bomb test from ever happening in the Nevada
desert. The government postponed the test last month, but those
against it, feel that's not enough.
The group believes the government has not completed enough
testing to guarantee the safety of a large weapons test.
Protesters' concerns center around two big issues. One of those
is the environmental health risk to potential downwinders. They
fear radioactive dust would get kicked up into the air from the
700 ton blast.
Another concern is the blast would be in direct conflict with
the Treaty of Ruby Valley, a treaty the U.S. entered in good
faith with the Western Shoshone tribe in 1964.
"I hope to wake up some of the Nevada congressional people to
their responsibility to stand behind the western Shoshone and
protect these areas, and that includes stopping all military
testing at the military test site," protestor Julie Fishel says.
The original test date was June 2nd, then it was pushed back to
June 23rd. Then, just last week, it was postponed indefinitely.
Protestors say they hope their demonstration will help keep it
that way.
All content © Copyright 2001 - 2006 WorldNow and KRNV. All
Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
57 World Uranium Resources Ample For Projected Nuclear Energy Needs - UN Study
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:00:55 -0400
X-Fingerprint: news11-admin@lists.un.org-127.127
WORLD URANIUM RESOURCES AMPLE FOR PROJECTED NUCLEAR ENERGY NEEDS
– UN STUDY
New York, Jun 5 2006 12:00PM
Global uranium resources are more than adequate to meet projected
requirements for nuclear electricity generation, according to the
latest edition of a United Nations-backed world reference guide.
Uranium 2005: Resources, Production and Demand, jointly prepared
by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2006/uranium_resources.html">IAEA)
and the Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates
the total identified amount of conventional uranium stock, which
can be mined for less than $130 per kilo, at about 4.7 million
tonnes.
Based on the 2004 nuclear electricity generation rate of demand,
that is sufficient for 85 years, according to the study, also known
as the ‘Red Book.’ Fast reactor technology would lengthen this
period to over 2,500 years.
But world uranium resources in total are considered to be much higher.
Based on geological evidence and knowledge of uranium in phosphates,
the study considers that more than 35 million tonnes are
available for exploitation.
By 2025, world nuclear energy capacity is expected to grow to between
22 per cent and 44 per cent, raising annual uranium requirements
to between 80,000 tonnes and 100,000 tonnes. The currently identified
resources are adequate to meet this expansion.
The spot price of uranium has also increased fivefold since 2001,
fuelling major new initiatives and investment in exploration. Worldwide
exploration expenditures in 2004 totalled over $130 million,
an increase of almost 40 per cent compared to 2002, and close
to $200 million in 2005. This can be expected to lead to further
additions to the uranium resource base. A significant number of
new mining projects have also been announced that could substantially
boost the world's uranium production capacity., the guide says.
In the longer term, continuing advances in nuclear technology will
allow a substantially better utilization of uranium resources.
Reactor designs are being developed and tested that are capable of
extracting more than 30 times the energy from the uranium than
today's reactors.
The study provides substantial new information from all major uranium
production centres in Africa, Australia, Central Asia, Eastern
Europe and North America.
The OECD groups 30 member countries sharing a commitment to democratic
government and the market economy, mainly the top industrialized
nations.
2006-06-05 00:00:00.000
________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
58 Guardian Unlimited: Envoy to Show Iranians Anti-Uranium Deal
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 5, 2006 1:16 PM
AP Photo BRU102
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iranian officials have agreed to meet
Tuesday with a senior EU representative carrying a six-nation
package of rewards and penalties meant to stop Tehran's uranium
enrichment program, diplomats said.
Chief European Union foreign policy official Javier Solana had
been expected to present the proposal to Iranian officials
sometime this week, but the precise day had not been divulged.
The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the
timetable was confidential, said Monday that Solana would submit
the package to Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.
The six-nation package offers economic and political incentives
if Tehran relinquishes domestic enrichment, which is used to
generate power but can also produce weapons-grade uranium for
warheads. The offer also contains the threat of U.N. sanctions
if Iran remains defiant.
In a breakthrough last week, the United States agreed to join in
multi-nation talks on the package if Tehran suspends enrichment.
Diplomats revealed Monday that Washington has sweetened the
offer originally drawn up by France, Britain and Germany by
saying it will lift some bilateral sanctions on Tehran such as a
ban on Boeing passenger aircraft and related parts if Iran
agrees to an enrichment freeze.
Iranian officials have sent conflicting signals on the
six-nation initiative, reflecting a possible struggle within the
leadership on how to react.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, normally a hardline
critic of the United States who insists that Tehran has a right
to enrichment, said on the weekend that a breakthrough in
negotiations was possible and welcomed the U.S. offer to join
talks, while rejecting preconditions.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
59 AU ABC: Clean-up plan for Kakadu uranium mines revealed
ABC Northern Territory | Local News | Story
Monday, 5 June 2006. 11:47 (AEDT)Monday, 5 June 2006. 10:47
The Federal Government has announced that old uranium mine
leases in Kakadu National Park will be brought back under the
park's authority and cleaned up.
The isolated pockets total 466 hectares of land in the South
Alligator River area and were mined up to 50 years ago.
The Parliamentary Secretary for the Environment, Greg Hunt, says
the Government will spend $7.3 million over four years on
rehabilitating the land and safely storing waste.
"We're in consultations with the traditional owners," he said.
"They have interestingly said that the waste is from that area
so they want to ensure that the waste is interred precisely
where it came from - exactly the same holes.
"We're going to look at that over the next four years."
Mr Hunt says one of the areas that will be incorporated is
Coronation Hill.
"It's a very important symbol of the Indigenous people within
the area, to the Jawoyn people," he said.
"It says to Australia that we can rehabilitate uranium mines in
some of the most sensitive areas in the country."
Northern Territory Environment Centre spokesman Peter Robertson
says the clean-up is long overdue.
"We certainly applaud Greg Hunt and the federal Department of
Environment for embarking on it, very belatedly and we think
it's a good thing to be doing," he said.
But the Greens Senator Bob Brown says the announced changes will
do nothing to improve the Kakadu National Park.
"Mining in the national park for uranium was effectively
prohibited when the Hawke government extended Kakadu Park to
encompass these areas back in 199," he said.
"This is really tidying up past dilemmas in the area ready for
expanded uranium mining."
*****************************************************************
60 ACS: Plutonium Oxidation and Subsequent Reduction by Mn(IV) Minerals
in Yucca Mountain Tuff
[ACS Publications Division]
Environ. Sci. Technol., 40 (11), 3508 -3514, 2006 .
10.1021/es052353+ S0013-936X(05)02353-9
Web Release Date: May 5, 2006
Copyright © 2006 American Chemical Society
Plutonium Oxidation and Subsequent Reduction by Mn(IV) Minerals
in Yucca Mountain Tuff
Brian A. Powell,* Martine C. Duff, Daniel I. Kaplan, Robert A.
Fjeld, Matthew Newville, Douglas B. Hunter, Paul M. Bertsch,
John T. Coates, Peter Eng, Mark L. Rivers, Steven M. Serkiz,
Stephen R. Sutton, Ines R. Triay, and David T. Vaniman#
Department of Environmental Engineering and Science, Clemson
University, Anderson, South Carolicience, Clemson University,
Anderson, South Carolina 29630, Savannah River National
Laboratory, Aiken, South Carolina 29808, Department of
Geophysical Sciences and Center for Advanced Radiation Sources,
The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, Savannah
River Ecology Laboratory, The University of Georgia, Aiken,
South Carolina 29808, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, New
Mexico 88221, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New
Mexico 87545
Received for review November 22, 2005
Revised manuscript received April 5, 2006
Accepted April 5, 2006
Abstract:
Plutonium oxidation state distribution on Yucca Mountain tuff
and synthetic pyrolusite (-MnO2) suspensions was measured using
synchrotron X-ray micro-spectroscopy and microimaging techniques
as well as ultrafiltration/solvent-extraction techniques.
Plutonium sorbed to the tuff was preferentially associated with
manganese oxides. For both Yucca Mountain tuff and synthetic
pyrolusite, Pu(IV) or Pu(V) was initially oxidized to more
mobile Pu(V/VI), but over time, the less mobile Pu(IV) became
the predominant oxidation state of the sorbed Pu. The observed
stability of Pu(IV) on oxidizing surfaces (e.g., pyrolusite), is
proposed to be due to the formation of a stable hydrolyzed
Pu(IV) surface species. These findings have important
implications in estimating the risk associated with the
geological burial of radiological waste in areas containing
Mn-bearing minerals, such as at the Yucca Mountain or the
Hanford Sites, because plutonium will be predominantly in a much
less mobile oxidation state (i.e., Pu(IV)) than previously
suggested (i.e., Pu(V/VI).
Introduction
The safe design of a radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel
repository requires an assessment of risks associated with the
potential release of radionuclides into the surrounding
environment. Knowledge of radionuclide geochemistry and the
surrounding environment is required for predicting subsurface
fate and transport. This task grows increasingly complicated for
constituents such as Pu, which exhibit complex environmental
chemistries. The environmental behavior of Pu can be influenced
by complexation, precipitation, adsorption, colloid formation,
microbial activity (e.g., direct interaction of biofilms or
complexation with exerdates, such as siderophores), and
oxidation/reduction (redox) reactions (1-5). The most important
of these factors controlling Pu mobility is redox, more
specifically, the oxidation state of Pu. This is because Pu(IV)
is generally 2-3 orders of magnitude less mobile than Pu(V/VI)
in most environments (6). Kaplan et al. (7) showed that Pu(IV)
moved 10 cm through a vadose zone sediment, with >95% of the Pu
remaining within 1.25 cm of the source, after 11 years of
exposure to natural rainfall conditions at the Department of
Energy (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS). Pu oxidation and
reduction reactions over the 11 year period were found to play
an important role in Pu transport through the pH 6.1 system
dominated with kaolinite, goethite, and hematite in the clay
fraction. Oxidation was attributed to wet-dry cycling and its
effects on Fe- and Mn-oxides and bacteria (8).
Pu commonly exists simultaneously in several oxidation states
(9-10). Choppin (11) reported Pu may exist as Pu(IV), Pu(V),
and/or Pu(VI) in oxic natural groundwaters. The pentavalent and
hexavalent oxidation states of Pu are typically stabilized in
aerated solutions (high EH) and high pH (12). The most common
assumed form of precipitated Pu in the environment is PuO2(s)
(11). The low solubility of PuO2(s) generally limits subsurface
mobility (although, enhanced transport of colloidal PuO2 has
been previously observed (11, 13-14)). Several researchers have
observed that Pu adsorbed 523531b00015">(15-17). Studies of Pu
speciation in natural waters indicated that Pu associated with
suspended particulate matter was Pu(IV), and aqueous phase Pu
was predominantly Pu(V) (12, 17-20). Pu(IV) added to NaCl
solutions, Gulf Stream water, or synthetic brines equilibrated
as either Pu(V) or Pu(VI) within a few days (1, 16, 21). Based
upon the observations described above, it has been generally
accepted that, in natural systems, Pu associ ated with suspended
particulate matter is predominantly Pu(IV), whereas Pu in the
aqueous phase is predominantly Pu(V).
There are several mechanisms by which Pu may undergo an
oxidation state transformation. Dissolved Pu may be oxidized by
dissolved oxidants (Cr2O7-2, MnO4-) or reduced by dissolved
reductants (Fe2+, natural organic matter). Plutonium oxidation
state transformations may also be mediated by a solid phase. In
these cases, a reduced species at the mineral surfaces may
provide a direct electron source or the mineral phase may be a
semiconductor, capable of providing a pathway for electron
mobility.
The influence of the character of Mn-containing minerals
expected to be found in subsurface repository environments on Pu
oxidation state distributions has been the subject of much
recent research. Kenney-Kennicutt and Morse (15), Duff et al.
(22), and Morgenstern and Choppin (23) observed oxidation of Pu
facilitated by Mn(IV)-bearing minerals. Conversely, Shaughnessy
et al. (24) used X-ray absorption near-edge Structure (XANES)
spectroscopy to show reduction of Pu(VI) by hausmannite
(MnIIMnIII2O4) and manganite (-MnIIIOOH), and Kersting et al.
(13) observed reduction of Pu(VI) by pyrolusite (MnIVO2). In
this paper, we attempt to reconcile the apparently conflicting
datasets by showing that Mn-bearing minerals can indeed oxidize
Pu; however, if the oxidized species remains associated with the
solid phase, the initial oxidation step is followed by reduction
to Pu(IV), which over time becomes the predominant solid-phase
Pu species. In this study, Pu sorbed to Yucca Mt. tuff (initial
XANES and elemental mapping results were reported by Duff et al.
(22)) were re-examined 2 years later. Additionally,
time-dependent changes in the oxidation state distribution of Pu
in synthetic pyrolusite suspensions were examined.
Materials and Methods
X-ray Absorption Spectroscopy. In a previous study, Duff et al.
(22) prepared Yucca Mountain tuff thin sections amended with Pu
for analysis by synchrotron-based micro-X-ray fluorescence
(micro-XRF) and micro-X-ray absorption near-edge structure
(XANES) spectroscopy. These measurements were performed 2 and 6
months after adding aqueous Pu(V) to the tuff. In the present
work, one of the tuff thin sections was re-analyzed by XANES 2
years after the addition of aqueous Pu(V).
For the micro-XANES studies, the synchrotron hard X-ray
fluorescence (XRF) microprobe on the undulator (Station ID-A) at
Sector 13 of the Advanced Photon Source (Argonne National
Laboratory, Argonne, IL) was used with a channel-cut Si(220)
monochromator. Microfocusing optics were used to produce a small
X-ray beam. A double elliptical Pt-coated Kirkpatrick-Baez
mirror system angled at 2 mrad was used to focus a monochromatic
undulator X-ray beam at the Pu LIII absorption edge (18 054 eV)
to a 4 m vertical by 7 m horizontal beam resulting in a flux of
about 10-10 photon s-1 (25). The thin section of tuff was
contained within fitted Teflon inserts with polypropylene and
Kapton windows, placed in an Al metal frame and mounted on an
automated, digital x-y-z stage at 45 to the beam. Fluorescent
X-rays were detected with a Si(Li) energy dispersive detector
(30 mm2 area) mounted at 90 to the incident beam and 1 cm from
the sample. The Pu-XANES spectra were collected on the L
emission line from 50 eV below the Pu absorption edge to >500 eV
above the Pu absorption edge in varying step increments from 0.4
to 2.5 eV. The monochromator position and undulator were scanned
simultaneously and the sample table was moved accordingly to
track the position of the X-ray beam during each scan. During
scanning, the change in theta () for the monochromator was from
0.0015 to 0.002. Count times varied from 1 s (PuO2 solid and
BaPu(VI)O6) to 10 s (thin section) per point. Most scans were
repeated from five to nine times. The spectra are normalized to
the edge step and not the first absorption peak, which is often
referred to as the "whiteline". The XANES edge energies were
determined based on the half-height of the edge step as
described by Duff et al. (22).
Pyrolusite Preparation. Pyrolusite (-MnO2) was prepared using
the technique described by McKenzie (26). The
Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) surface area was measured using a
nitrogen gas adsorption analyzer (ASAP 2010, Micrometrics,
Inc.), and X-ray powder diffraction (XRD) spectra were obtained
on a Scintag XDS2000 powder dif fractometer. The
point-of-zero-salt effect was determined by potentiometric
titrations in 0.01, 0.05, and 0.10 M NaCl. The redox capacity in
equivalents per gram of mineral, which can be related to the
average Mn oxidation state, was determined via iodometric
titration using the method of Carpenter (27) and Murray et al.,
(28). Physical and chemical characterization of the pyrolusite
and detailed descriptions of the analytical methods are provided
in the online Supporting Information.
Pu(IV) and Pu(V) Working Solution Preparation. A 70 M Pu(NO3)4
stock solution (Isotope Products, Valencia, CA) was used to
prepare 238Pu(V) and 238Pu(IV) working solutions. The 238Pu
accounted for >99.9% of all the Pu in the working solution. All
Pu working solutions were prepared in 0.01 M NaCl. Pu(IV)
solutions were prepared by evaporating an aliquot of the Pu
stock solution to dryness several times in 1.0 M HNO3. The dried
residue was brought up in a small volume of 1.0 M HNO3 then
diluted to the desired Pu concentration in 0.01 M NaCl. New
Pu(IV) working solutions were prepared for each experiment.
Pu(V) working solutions were prepared as previously described
(29). Oxidation state analysis was performed by parallel
extraction of the Pu solution into 0.5 M thenoyltrifluoroacetone
(TTA, Alfa Asear, Ward Hill, MA) in cyclohexane at pH 0.5 and
0.5 M bis-(ethyhexyl)-phosphoric acid (HDEHP; Alfa Asear, Ward
Hill, MA) in heptane at pH 0.5 (30-32). A 0.5 M HDEHP solution
in heptane extracts Pu(IV) and Pu(VI) from a pH 0 aqueous phase,
leaving Pu(V) behind. A 0.5 M TTA solution in cyclohexane
extracts Pu(IV) from a pH 0 aqueous phase, leaving Pu(V) and
Pu(VI) behind. If present, Pu(III) and colloidal-Pu(IV) will
also remain in the aqueous phase during the TTA extraction.
However, Pu(III) is unstable under the described experimental
conditions and the filtration step (discussed below) will remove
any colloidal-Pu(IV) from solution. Therefore, these components
are not considered during analysis. The eight Pu(IV) working
solutions prepared for batch kinetic and pH adsorption edge
experiment had an average purity of 94% ± 1% Pu(IV). Similarly,
the Pu(V) working solutions for kinetic sorption tests and pH
adsorption edge experiments contained 93% ± 5% Pu(V) and 99% ±
4% Pu(V), respectively. A complete oxidation state distribution
and Pu concentration of each working solution is presented in
the online Supporting Information. The oxidation state of Pu(IV)
and Pu(V) working solutions (with no solid phase present) at pH
3, 5, and 8 were monitored over 30 days. These solutions showed
no change in Pu(V) oxidation state. After 30 days, Pu(IV)
working solutions contained 14% and 10% Pu(V) at pH 5 and 8,
respectively. This is expected based upon thermodynamic
considerations and the observed stability of Pu(V) in NaCl
solutions (16, 20-21). 238Pu concentrations were measured with
an alpha-beta discriminating liquid scintillation counter
(Wallac Inc., model 1415, Boston, MA). All reported Pu error was
propagated from liquid scintillation uncertainties.
Oxidation State Analysis Technique. The oxidation state
distribution of Pu in each sample for each reaction time was
measured using a combined ultrafiltration and solvent extraction
technique which is briefly described below (15, 23, 29, 33).
First the oxidation state distribution of aqueous Pu is
measured. Then the total system (solid and aqueous phase
combined) Pu oxidation state distribution is measured by
lowering the pH to leach Pu from the solid phase. Control
experiments carrying single oxidation state Pu(IV), Pu(V), and
Pu(VI) solutions through the oxidation state analysis technique
verified the stability of each oxidation state during the
analysis (details presented in the online Supporting
Information).
For each reaction time, a 2.5-mL aliquot of the aqueous phase
was removed and passed through a 12-nm filter (Microsep 30K MWCO
centrifugal device; Pall Corporation, East Hills, NY). An
aliquot of the filtrate was removed to determine the aqueous
phase Pu concentration, and oxida tion state distribution in the
remaining filtrate was measured using the parallel solvent
extraction technique discussed above. These data can be used to
express the concentration and oxidation state distribution of Pu
in the aqueous phase (eq 1).
The pH of the remaining sample, aqueous and solid phase, was
lowered to 1.5 using HClO4 and mixed for 15 min to
quantitatively leach Pu(V) and Pu(VI) from the mineral surface.
Quantitative leaching of Pu(V) and Pu(VI) was verified using
Np(V) and U(VI) as oxidation state analogues. A detailed
discussion and data describing the use of oxidation state
analogues to verify the oxidation state analysis technique are
provided in the online Supporting Information. Incomplete
leaching of tetravalent actinides was quantified and accounted
for in the determination of the Pu oxidation state distribution
by assuming that any Pu remaining on the solid phase was Pu(IV).
The Pu mass balance for the total system (solid and aqueous
phases combined) is expressed in eq 2:
where m is the mass of the solid phase (g), V is the volume of
the aqueous phase (L), and [Pu(IV)], [Pu(V)], and [Pu(VI)] are
the concentrations of Pu in the these oxidation states (mol/L or
mol/g). Again, the [Pu(X)]aq parameters were measured in the
aqueous phase in contact with the solid phase, and [Pu(X)]solid
parameters were measured in the filtered pH 1.5 extracts. The Pu
distribution among the three oxidation states is expressed as a
fraction to account for both the solid phase and aqueous phase
contributions (eq 3).
In some cases, the fraction of each Pu oxidation state on the
solid phase was inferred by subtracting the aqueous phase Pu
oxidation state distribution from the total distribution. This
was done by rearranging eq 2 for [Pu(IV)]solidmsolid,
[Pu(V)]solidmsolid, or [Pu(VI)]solidmsolid and normalizing the
data by dividing each term by the total mass of Pu added. To
ensure an accurate mass balance as described in eq 2, the total
activity of Pu in each system was measured in fourteen randomly
selected samples which were digested in a 5 M HNO3/5M HCl
solution at the end of the experiment. Pu recoveries ranged from
94% to 106%.
Batch Kinetic Experiments. Approximately 40 ± 0.4 mg of
pyrolusite was added to 15-mL polypropylene centrifuge tubes.
Negligible sorption of Pu to the vial walls in samples containing
a solid phase was verified by washing the remaining suspension
from the tube at the end of the experiment with 0.01 M NaCl then
leaching any Pu with 1 M HCl. Ten-mL of a pH-adjusted, 0.01 M
NaCl solution amended with 6.1 × 10-11 M Pu(V) was added to each
tube to create suspensions with 10 m2 L-1 (4.00 ± 0.04 g L-1).
Suspensions were mechanically mixed end-over-end in the dark for
various reaction times and subsequently analyzed using the
oxidation state analysis technique described above. Suspensions
were mixed in the dark to minimize photochemically catalyzed
reactions (15, 33). These experiments, as well as all others
discussed here, were conducted on the lab benchtop and no effort
was made to restrict the amount of CO2 (gas) permitted to come
into contact with the various experimental systems. CO2 (gas)
will influence the aqueous and solid phase speciation, especially
as the pH increases. The pH of each sample was measured
immediately prior to analysis using an Orion Triode calibrated
with pH 4.01, 7.00, and 10.01 standard Orion buffer solutions.
The electrode potential was measured using an Orion 420A meter.
In one experiment, 300 m o.d. synthetic glass beads were used as
the solid phase. The surface area was calculated using the
reported diameter of 300 m and assuming a spherical geometry. A
calculated mass of glass was added to each sample to maintain a
constant glass surface area concentra tion of 10 m2L-1 in the
suspensions throughout the experi ment. The glass beads used in
this work were first washed in a basic solution, then in an
acidic bath to decrease the likelihood of an organic or inorganic
surface contaminant. Element analysis by ICP-ES indicated the
glass contained 4.23 ± 0.49 g g-1 Fe, 0.33 ± 0.04 g g-1 Mn, and
99.6 ± 10.0 g g-1 Pb.
pH Adsorption Edge Experiments. Batch experiments to determine
sorption as a function of pH were conducted with pyrolusite.
Mineral suspensions of 10 m2 L-1 were prepared which spanned the
pH range 2-8 in 0.5 pH unit increments with 0.01 M NaCl as a
backing electrolyte. The amount of acid or base added was small
(maximum of 1% based on simple volume and molarity calculations)
with respect to the ionic strength of the background electrolyte.
The samples were mechanically mixed in the dark and pH adjusted
daily with 0.1 M HCl or 0.1 M NaOH. After the pH remained stable
for several days, an aliquot of a Pu(IV) or Pu(V) working
solution was added to yield an initial Pu concentration of 5.0 ×
10-11 M, and the samples were returned to the mechanical mixer.
pH was measured every 4 days and adjusted if necessary. After 30
days, the samples were analyzed using the total system oxidation
state analysis technique described above. Results and Discussion
Plutonium Interactions with Yucca Mountain Tuff. Using
micro-XANES, Duff et al. (22) observed oxidation of Pu(V) to
Pu(VI) following sorption to a natural zeolitic tuff from Yucca
Mt. The tuff contained trace quantities of manganese oxides and
more abundant Fe-oxide phases. Elemental maps generated with
micro-XRF imaging demonstrated that Pu was preferentially
associated with Mn oxides (specifically, ranciete,
(Ca,Mn)OMnIVO2·3H2O, an iso-structural form of birnessite, with
Ca as the dominant cation in the interlayer) and co-associated
smectites rather than with iron oxides or zeolites. These
measurements were performed 2 and 6 months after adding aqueous
Pu(V) to the tuff. In the present work, the tuff thin sections
were reanalyzed by XANES 2 years after the addition of aqueous
Pu(V). As shown in Figure 1, the predominant solid-phase species
after 2 years is Pu(IV). Additionally, the Pu is still found to
be associated with the mineral phases containing Mn, having an
estimated loading of 2000 mg Pu kg-1 at the Mn-rich regions on
the tuff. Therefore, the Pu(V) initially equilibrated with Yucca
Mountain tuff was oxidized to Pu(VI) or remained unchanged and
then reduced to Pu(IV) over time. These data from aged samples
appear to conflict with observations that Mn(IV)-containing
minerals are capable of oxidizing Pu (15, 23).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1 Plutonium L3-edge XANES spectra plotted with
respect to the relative XANES edge energy for sorbed Pu on YM
tuff at 6 months and 2 years. All spectra taken after 2 years
indicated an average oxidation state of Pu(IV); those taken after
6 months had average oxidation states predominantly of Pu(V) and
Pu(VI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kinetic Studies of Pu Interactions with Pyrolusite and Glass
Beads. To further examine interactions of Pu with Mn oxides,
batch sorption experiments were designed to study the
interactions between Pu and a synthetic Mn(IV) mineral,
pyrolusite, as a function of time and bulk solution pH. A plot of
Pu (initially Pu(IV)) sorbed versus time over the pH range
2.6-8.2 in pyrolusite suspensions is presented in Figure 2. At
all pH values, a large fraction of the Pu was sorbed within 5
min, ranging from 0.6 at pH 2.6 to >0.8 at pH 8.2. The initial
sorption phase was followed by a period of Pu desorption at the
pH values of 2.6 and 3.4 and continual slow uptake at pH 4.8 and
8.2. Nearly complete sorption of all Pu occurred after 7 days at
pH 4.8 and 8.2.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 2 Fraction of sorbed Pu versus time in 10 m2 L-1
(4.00 ± 0.04 g L-1) pyrolusite suspensions at varying pH levels.
Symbols: () pH 2.6, () pH 3.4, () pH 4.8, (×) pH 8.2. System
Parameters: [NaCl] = 0.01 M; initially added Pu(IV) at [Pu] = 6.1
× 10-11 M; error bars based upon propagation of liquid
scintillation counting uncertainties.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Insight into the processes responsible for these observa tions
can be gleaned from Pu oxidation state analyses over time in the
pH 2.6 and 8.2 systems (Figure 3). The plutonium oxidation state
in the aqueous phase and total system (aqueous and solid phase
combined) of the pH 2.6 and 8.2 systems were monitored over time
using the techniques described in the Materials and Methods
section. Oxidation of Pu(IV) at pH 2.6 occurs with a steady
decline of Pu(IV) and corresponding increases in Pu(V) and Pu(VI)
(Figure 3a). During these experiments, no Pu(IV) was detected in
the aqueous phase of the suspensions (data not shown), sug
gesting that Pu(IV) was oxidized on the pyrolusite surface and
subsequently partitioned into the aqueous phase as Pu(V/VI) at pH
2.6. The decrease in the fraction of Pu sorbed (Figure 2) and the
increase in the fraction of Pu(V/VI) in the system over time
(Figure 3a) indicate that oxidation to Pu(V/VI) was followed by
desorption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 3 Total system Pu oxidation state distribution in
10.0 ± 0.1 m2 L-1 (4.00 ± 0.04 g L-1) pyrolusite suspensions at
(a) pH 2.59 ± 0.04 and (b) pH 8.22 ± 0.04. Symbols: () Pu(IV), ()
Pu(V), () Pu(VI); error bars based upon propagation of liquid
scintillation counting uncertainties. System parameters: [NaCl] =
0.01 M; initially added Pu(IV) at [Pu] = 6.1 × 10-11 M).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Immediately following Pu(IV) addition to the pyrolusite
suspension at pH 8.2, there was a slight increase in the fraction
of Pu(V) and Pu(VI) (Figure 3b). During the first 60 min of
reaction and while Pu(V) and Pu(VI) were present, a small
fraction of Pu desorbed into the aqueous phase. Similar to the
suspension equilibrations at pH 2.6, no Pu(IV) was measured in
the aqueous phase, indicating a surface medi ated reaction. With
time, however, the oxidized Pu repartitioned to the pyrolusite
surface and was rereduced to Pu(IV). These data lead us to
conclude that Pu in the aqueous phase of a pyrolusite suspension
will be Pu(V/VI) and Pu sorbed to the solid phase will be Pu(IV).
These results are consistent with the XANES analysis of the
oxidation state distribution of sorbed Pu to natural Mn(IV)
phases within Yucca Mountain tuff (Figure 1). The enhanced
reaction rates in the pyrolusite study, as compared to the tuff
samples, may be due to a number of experimental and mineralogical
processes, such as the appreciably greater surface area and
better mixing achieved in the pyrolusite study. A kinetic study,
similar to those described using pyrolusite, was repeated using
synthetic glass beads and a Pu(V) amendment (the pyrolusite
system received Pu(IV)). Although the reaction kinetics were much
slower, the changes in Pu oxidation states were very similar to
those observed for pyrolusite (Figure 4). There was a decrease in
the fraction of Pu(V) in the system with a corresponding increase
in the fraction of Pu(IV), indicating that Pu(V) was being
reduced. Analysis of Pu in the aqueous phase showed no Pu(IV),
indicating that reduction in the system did not occur until Pu
was sorbed to the glass beads. Trace Fe in the glass, may have
been an electron source for Pu(V) reduction and hydroxide sites
on the glass surface may have stabilized Pu(IV) as a hydroxide
species. The reduction of Pu(V) by glass observed in these
experiments is similar to the observation by Kersting et al. (13)
of Pu(V) reduction by SiO2 using XANES. These are independent
observations using different techniques, both of which show the
reduction of sorbed Pu(V/VI) to Pu(IV) surface species.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 4 Total system Pu oxidation state distribution
changes when in contact with glass. Symbols: () Pu(IV), () Pu(V),
() Pu(VI); error bars based upon propagation of liquid
scintillation counting uncertainties. System parameters: pH 8.19
± 0.05; [glass] = 10.4 ± 0.3 m2 L-1(1.34 ± 0.04 g L-1); [NaCl] =
0.01 M; initially added Pu(V) at [Pu]total = 6.1 × 10-11 M.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Equilibrium Studies of Plutonium Interactions with Pyrolusite.
Sorption experiments as a function of pH were conducted to
provide information about the Pu oxidation state distribution
after 30 days of equilibration in pyrolusite suspensions amended
with Pu(IV) or Pu(V). Data describing the Pu oxidation state
distribution in the total system and solid phase are presented in
Figure 5. The data sets are nearly identical, irrespective of
whether Pu(IV) or Pu(V) was initially added, indicating that
steady state had been achieved. The pH sorption edge occurs
around pH 3 (online Supporting Information). Below this pH, all
the aqueous Pu was in the +5 and +6 oxidation states (data not
shown) and a majority of the solid phase Pu was also in the +5
and +6 form. Above pH 3, Pu in the solid phase was almost
entirely in the +4 state, again, irrespective of whether Pu(IV)
or Pu(V) was initially added to the system. Therefore, at pH
values below the sorption edge, Pu was oxidized and partitioned
into the aqueous phase and at pH values above the sorption edge,
>95% of the total Pu was sorbed and Pu(IV) was the predominant
oxidation state.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 5 Total system (aqueous and solid phases oxidation
state distribution versus pH after 30 days in (a) initially
Pu(IV) and (b) initially Pu(V) pyrolusite systems. Symbols: ()
Pu(IV), () Pu(V), () Pu(VI); error bars based upon propagation of
liquid scintillation counting uncertainties. System parameters:
[Pu]total = 6.1 × 10-11 M; [pyrolusite] = 9.9 ± 0.3 m2 L-1 (3.92
± 0.05 g L-1); [NaCl] = 0.01 M.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The redox capacity of the pyrolusite used in these experiments
was measured by an iodometric titration method (27, 28). The
redox capacity, which can be related to the average Mn oxidation
state, was 2.41 ± 0.11 × 10-2 equivalents g-1. This corresponds
to a O:Mn ratio of 1.95 ± 0.03, instead of the ideal ratio of
2.00. Therefore, some Mn(II) or Mn(III) may have been present in
the pyrolusite, providing an electron source for the reduction
reaction with Pu(V/VI). Because only trace Pu concentrations
([Pu]total = 6.1 × 10-11 M) were used in these experiments, only
trace Mn(II) or Mn(III) substitutions would be necessary to
provide sufficient amount of electrons for the reduction
reaction. Manganese typically exists in multiple oxidation states
in natural and anthropogenic minerals (34). Additionally, it is
noteworthy that pyrolusite is a semiconductor with a band gap ap
proximately 1 order of magnitude lower than that of hematite (35)
and may be capable of transporting electrons through the mineral
lattice as discussed for iron (oxyhydr)oxides (35-36). The
effects of semiconductor properties in these systems could be
similar to that proposed in describing Pu interactions with
goethite and hematite (33).
Disproportionation of Pu(V) or Pu(IV) is not considered to
significantly effect the Pu oxidations state distribution in
these systems because of the low total Pu concentration. In
acidic conditions, Pu(V) can disproportionate to form Pu(IV) and
Pu(VI) if the initial Pu(V) concentration is sufficiently high.
The reaction is as follows (37):
The rate of disproportionation depends on the square of the Pu
concentration and, therefore, decreases rapidly as Pu approaches
tracer levels. Additionally, Pu(V) disproportionation has a
fourth power dependence on the hydrogen ion concentration and is
therefore favored in acidic solutions. Disproportionation of
Pu(IV) occurs through the reaction (38):
Pu(IV) disproportionation has a third power dependence on the Pu
concentration and will therefore proceed very slowly at tracer
level Pu concentrations. The Pu(III) noted in eq 2 would be
unstable and likely oxidized by water at the circum-neutral pH
values where the experiments were conducted. The stability of
Pu(V) and Pu(IV) in the working solutions over time demonstrates
that disporportionation is not significant over the time period
of these experiments. However, as Pu is attracted to a mineral
surface, the local concentration within the electrical double
layer will be higher than that of the bulk solution. The effects
of this concentration gradient on Pu disproportionation have not
been examined.
Possible Reaction Mechanisms. The ability of birnessite,
pyrolusite, and other Mn(III,IV)-containing minerals to oxidize
other metal species has been shown by a number of researchers
(15, 23, 39-43). Despite the observed oxidizing nature of Mn
minerals, this work has shown that Pu(IV) is the stable oxidation
state of Pu sorbed to some Mn(IV) oxide minerals. Several other
researchers have observed reduction of Pu on Mn containing
minerals. Following the addition of Pu(V) to birnessite
solutions, Keeney-Kennicutt and Morse (15) observed Pu(IV),
Pu(V), and Pu(VI) on the mineral surface. They attributed the
observed oxidation of Pu to interaction with Mn(IV). The authors
did not comment on the large fractions of Pu(IV) observed
following addition of Pu(V) to a birnessite suspension.
Shaughnessy et al. (24) observed reduction of plutonium on
hausmannite (Mn3O4) and manganite (-MnOOH) surfaces. Kersting et
al. (13) observed Pu(IV) as the predominant solid-phase oxidation
state on both pyrolusite and birnessite.
The stability of Pu(IV) is proposed to be due to the formation of
a stable hydrolyzed Pu(IV) surface species. An explanation may
lie in a discussion from Morgenstern and Choppin (23), who were
studying oxidation of Pu(IV) by a synthetic manganese dioxide
(MnO2, crystalline structure unknown). They observed that Pu(IV)
was oxidized to Pu(V) and Pu(VI) at low pH (2.0-3.5), but
oxidation was inhibited at high pH (8.0) values. Inhibition of
oxidation at higher pH was attributed to the stabilization of
Pu(IV) as the fully hydrolyzed species Pu(OH)4(aq). Significant
amounts of Pu(OH)4 (aq) have been shown to be present at pH
values as low as 4 (1). Since hydrolysis will change the redox
potential of a given Pu species, Pu reduction on a mineral
surface is dependent on both Pu speciation/hydrolysis at the
mineral surface as well as the redox capacity of the surface. It
is possible that hydrolysis of surface bound Pu(IV) may
sufficiently alter the reduction potential such that reoxidation
of Pu(IV) by Mn(IV) is not energetically favorable. This
mechanism by which the hydrolysis and sorption of Pu changes the
free energy to provide a barrier against reoxidation by Mn(IV)
may be somewhat similar to that put forth by Wan et al. (44), who
observed the reoxidation of bioreduced U under reducing
conditions. Microbial respiration produced (bi)carbonate and
reoxidation of U purportedly occurred due to the thermodynamic
stability of U(VI) carbonate complexes, although microbially
mediated U(VI) reduction to U(IV) was initially observed and the
microbial reducing community was sustained throughout the
experiment.
The oxidation and reduction of Pu observed in these systems
likely occurred through different reaction pathways. The
effective charge for Pu species decreases in the order Pu(IV)+4,
Pu(VI)O2+2, Pu(V)O2+; making Pu(IV) more surface active compared
to Pu(V). McCubbin and Leonard (45) observed competitive sorption
between Ca2+ and Mg2+ cations with Pu(V), while similar effects
of Pu(IV) sorption were not observed. These data indicate
sorption of Pu(V) likely occurs through formation of outer-sphere
complexes while Pu(IV) forms inner-sphere complexes. These two
adsorption mechanisms likely have a significant impact on Pu
oxidation state transformations. Oxidation of Pu by Mn-bearing
minerals appears to be favored as long as the oxidized species is
desorbed from the mineral surface or weakly electrostatically
adsorbed. This occurs at low pH levels where the pyrolusite
surface carries a net positive charge which will repel the
cationic Pu(V) and Pu(VI) species. As the pH increases and the
negative surface charge increases, Pu will be attracted to the
surface where redox reactions may occur. Interactions between the
strongly hydrolyzable Pu(IV) cation or free Pu(V)O2+ cation with
mineral surfaces may result in the formation of a stable
Pu(IV)-hydroxide surface complex. Hydrolysis of a Pu(IV) surface
complex (following or coincident with Pu(V) reduction), coupled
with the eventual loss of water from the hydration sphere upon
formation of a Pu(IV) surface complex, may provide a barrier to
Pu(IV) reoxidation. Therefore, Pu(IV) hydrolysis may be the
driving force for the observed stability of Pu(IV) on the mineral
surface. This is supported by the observation of Pu(V) reduction
on glass beads as well as the stability of Pu(IV) on an oxidizing
surface such as pyrolusite.
The proposed mechanisms in this work are supported by the
observations that (1) regardless of the initial aqueous Pu
oxidation state added to a system, similar oxidation state
distributions were obtained after 30 days of contact in
pyrolusite suspensions, (2) initial oxidation followed by
reduction was observed in pyrolusite and tuff systems, (3)
reduction of Pu(V) was observed in pyrolusite suspensions despite
the observed oxidizing capacity of Mn(IV) oxides, and (4) Pu(V)
or Pu(VI) remaining on the solid phase of both tuff and synthetic
pyrolusite are eventually reduced to Pu(IV). The proposed
mechanisms are largely speculative, based on long-term
experimental observations and theoretical thermodynamic
considerations. To truly describe the interfacial reactions
occurring in these systems, techniques capable of investigating
the mineral-water interface in real-time are required. That
Mn(IV) minerals can oxidize Pu(IV) to the more mobile Pu(V/VI)
forms has required regulators and risk assessors to assume that
Pu emplaced at some geological waste repositories will be more
mobile than may, in fact, be the case. This study lends itself to
a new conceptual model describing Pu geochemistry that can be
used to more accurately predict the risk associated with the
disposal of Pu-containing waste. Acknowledgment
This research was supported in part by the South Carolina
Universities Research and Education Foundation (SCUREF) under the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) contract
DE-FC09-00SR22184-Cooperative Agreement DOES0015, "Radiochemistry
Education Award Program (REAP II)". Additionally, this work was
supported in part by DOE's Environmental Management Science
Program (EMSP). Por tions of this work were performed at
GeoSoilEnviro-CARS (GSE-CARS), Sector 13, Advanced Photon Source
(APS). Use of the APS was supported by the DOE, Basic Energy
Sciences, Office of Energy Research, under contract no.
W-31-109-Eng-38. The research was also supported by Financial
Assistance Award no. DE-FC09-96SR18546 from the DOE to the
University of Georgia Research Foundation. We also thank the
associate editor and four anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments. Supporting Information Available
Data demonstrating leaching of the oxidation state analogues from
pyrolusite and other experimental controls used in the oxidation
state analysis technique; physical and chemical characterization
of pyrolusite; additional Pu oxidation state distribution data in
pyrolusite suspensions at pH 3.4. This material is available free
of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.
* Corresponding author phone: (925) 422-0280 e-mail:
powell37@llnl.gov. Current Address: Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94551.
Department of Environmental Engineering and Science, Clemson
University.
Savannah River National Laboratory.
Department of Geophysical Sciences and Center for Advanced
Radiation Sources, The University of Chicago.
Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, The University of Georgia.
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, NM.
# Los Alamos National Laboratory.
1. Morse, J. W.; Choppin, G. R. The chemistry of transuranic
elements in natural waters. Rev. Aquat. Sci. 1991, 4(1), 1-22.
[ChemPort]
2. Silva, R. J.; Nitsche, H. Actinide environmental chemistry.
Radiochim. Acta 1995, 70/71, 377-396. [ChemPort]
3. Neu, M. P.; Icopini, G. A.; Boukhalfa, H. Plutonium speciation
affected by environmental bacteria. Radiochim. Acta 2002, 93,
705-715.
4. Panak, P. J.; Nitsche, H. Interaction of aerobic soil bacteria
with plutonium(VI). Radiochim. Acta 2001, 89, 499-504. [ChemPort]
5. Panak, P. J.; Cooth, C. W.; Caulder, D. L.; Bucher, J. J.;
Shuh, D. K.; Nitsche, H. X-ray absorption fine structure
spectroscopy of plutonium complexes with Bacillus sphaericus.
Radiochim. Acta 2002, 90, 315-321. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
6. Prout, W. E. Adsorption of fission products by Savannah River
plant soil. Soil Sci. 1958, 86, 13-17.
7. Kaplan, D. I.; Powell, B. A.; Demirkanli, D. I.; Fjeld, R. A.;
Molz, F. J.; Serkiz, S. M.; Coates, J. T. Influence of oxidation
states on plutonium mobility during long-term transport through
an unsaturated subsurface environment. Environ. Sci. Technol.
2004, 38, 5053-5058.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
8. Kaplan, D. I.; Demirkanli, D. I.; Gumapas, L.; Powell, B. A.;
Fjeld, R. A.; Molz, F. J.; Serkiz, S. M. 11-Year Field Study of
Pu Migration from Pu III, IV, and VI Sources. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2006, 40, 443-448.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
9. Cleveland, J. M. The Chemistry of Plutonium; American Nuclear
Society: La Grange Park, IL, 1979.
10. Weigel, F.; Katz, J. J.; Seaborg, G. T. In The Chemistry of
the Actinide Elements; Katz, J. J., Seaborg, G. T., Morss, L. R.,
Eds.; Chapman & Hall: New York, 1986; Vol. 1, pp 680-702.
11. Choppin, G. R. Actinide speciation in the environment.
Radiochim. Acta 2003, 91, 645-649. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
12. Runde, W.; Conradson, S. D.; Efurd, D. W.; Lu, N.; VanPelt,
C. E.; Tait, C. D. Solubility and sorption of redox-sensitive
radionuclides (Np, Pu) in J-13 water from the Yucca Mountain
site: comparison between experimental and theory. App. Geochem.
2002, 17, 837-853. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
13. Kersting, A. B.; Zhao, P.; Zavarin, M.; Sylwester, E. R.;
Allen, P. G.; Williams, R. W. Chapter 5: sorption of Pu(V) on
mineral colloids. In Colloidal-Facilitated Transport of
Low-Solubility Radionuclides: A Field, Experimental, and Modeling
Investiga tion, report UCRL-ID-149688; Kersting A. B.; Reimus, P.
W. Eds.; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: Livermore, CA.
14. Kersting, A. B.; Efurd, D. W.; Finnegan, D. L.; Rokop, D. J.;
Smith, D. K.; Thompson, J. L. Migration of plutonium in
groundwater at the Nevada Test Site. Nature 1999, 397, 56-59.
[ChemPort] [CrossRef]
15. Keeney-Kennicutt, W. L.; Morse, J. W. The redox chemistry of
Pu(V)O2+ interactions with common mineral surfaces in dilute
solutions and seawater. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1985, 49,
2577-2588. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
16. Sanchez, A. L.; Murray, J. W.; Sibley, T. H. The adsorption
of plutonium IV and V on goethite. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1985,
49, 2297-2307. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
17. Penrose, W. R.; Metta, D. N.; Hylko, J. M.; Rinckel, L. A.
The reduction of plutonium(V) by aquatic sediments. J. Environ.
Radioact. 1987, 5, 169-184. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
18. Nelson, D. M.; Lovett, M. B. Oxidation state of plutonium in
the irish sea. Nature 1978, 276, 599-601. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
19. Mitchell, P. E.; Battle, J. V.; Downes, A. B.; Bondren, O.
M.; Vintro, L. L.; Sanchez-Cabeza, J. A. Recent observations on
the physicochemical speciation of plutonium in the Irish Sea and
the Western-Mediterranean. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 1995, 46(11),
1175. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
20. Orlandini, K. A.; Penrose, W. R.; Nelson, D. M. Pu(V) as the
stable form of oxidized plutonium in natural waters. Mar. Chem.
1986, 18, 49-57. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
21. Nitsche, H.; Roberts, K.; Xi, R.; Prussin, T.; Becraft, K.;
Mahamid, I. A.; Silber, H. B.; Carpenter S. A.; Gatti, R. C.
Long-term plutonium solubility and speciation studies in a
synthetic brine. Radiochim. Acta 1994, 66/67, 3-8. [ChemPort]
22. Duff, M. C.; Hunter, D. B.; Triay, I. R.; Bertsch, P. M.;
Reed, D. T.; Sutton, S. R.; Shea-McCarthy, G.; Kitten, J.; Eng,
P.; Chipera, S. J.; Vaniman, D. T. Mineral associations and
average oxidation states of sorbed Pu on tuff. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 1999, 33, 2163-2169.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
23. Morgenstern, A.; Choppin, G. R. Kinetics of the oxidation of
Pu(IV) by manganese oxide. Radiochim. Acta 2002, 90, 69-74.
[ChemPort]
24. Shaughnessy, D. A.; Nitsche, H.; Booth, C. H.; Shuh, D. K.;
Waychunas, G. A.; Wilson, R. E.; Gill, H.; Cantrell, K. J.;
Serne, R. J. Molecular interfacial reactions between Pu(VI) and
manganese oxide minerals manganite and hausmannite. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2003, 37(15), 3367-3374.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
[Medline]
25. Eng, P. J.; Rivers, M. L.; Yang, B. X.; Schildkamp, W.
Microfocusing 4-keV to 65-keV X-rays with bent Kirkpatrick-Baez
mirrors Proc. SPIE 1995, 25(16), 41-51.
26. McKenzie, R. M. The synthesis of birnessite, cryptomelane,
and some other oxides and hydroxides or manganese. Mineral. Mag.
1971, 38, 493-502. [ChemPort]
27. Carpenter, J. H. The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for
the Winkler dissolved oxygen method. Luminology Oceanogr. 1965,
10(1), 141-143. [ChemPort]
28. Murray, J. W.; Balistrieri, L. S.; Paul, B. The oxidation
state of manganese in marine sediments and ferromanganese
nodules. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1984, 48, 1237-1247. [ChemPort]
[CrossRef]
29. Powell, B. A.; Fjeld, R. A.; Kaplan, D. I.; Coates, J. T.;
Serkiz, S. M. Pu(V)O2+ adsorption and reduction by synthetic
magnetite (Fe3O4). Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38,
6016-6024.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
30. Bertrand, P. A.; Choppin, G. R. Separation of actinides in
difference oxidation states by solvent extraction. Radiochim.
Acta 1982, 31, 135-137. [ChemPort]
31. Kobashi, A.; Choppin, G. R.; Morse, J. W. A study of
techniques for separating plutonium in different oxidation
states. Radiochim. Acta 1988, 43, 211-215. [ChemPort]
32. Neu, M. P.; Hoffman, D. C.; Roberts, K. E.; Nitsche, H.;
Silva, R. J. Comparison of chemical extractions and laser
photoacoustic spectroscopy for determination of plutonium species
in near-neutral carbonate solutions. Radiochim. Acta 1994, 66,
265-272.
33. Powell, B. A.; Fjeld, R. A.; Kaplan, D. I.; Coates, J. T.;
Serkiz, S. M. Pu(V)O2+ adsorption and reduction by synthetic
hematite (-Fe2O3) and goethite (-FeOOH). Environ. Sci. Technol.
2005, 39, 2107-2114.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
34. McKenzie. R. M. Manganese Oxides and Hydroxides. In Minerals
in Soil Environments, 2nd ed.; Dixon, J. B., Weed, S. B., Eds.;
Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI, 1989; pp 439-466.
35. Waite, T. A. Photoredox processes at the mineral-water
interface. In Mineral-Water Interface Geochemistry; Hochella, M.
F., White A. F., Eds.; Mineralogical Society of America:
Washington, DC, 1990; Vol. 23, pp 559-601.
36. Williams, A. G. B.; Scherer, M. M. Spectroscopic evidence for
Fe(II)-Fe(III) electron transfer at the iron oxide-water
interface. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 4782-4790.[Full text
- ACS] [ChemPort] [Medline]
37. Rabideau, S. W. The Kinetics of the Disproportionation of
Pu(V). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1957, 79, 6350-6353. [ChemPort]
38. Rabideau, S. W. Equilibria and Reaction Rates in the
Disproportionation of Pu(IV). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1952, 75,
798-801.
39. Fredrickson, J. K.; Zachara, J. M.; Kennedy, D. W.; Liu, C.;
Duff, M. C.; Hunter, D. B.; Dohnalkova, A. Influence of Mn oxides
on the reduction of uranium(VI) by the metal reducing bacterium
shewanella putrefaciens. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2002, 66(18),
3247-3262. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
40. Weaver, R. M.; Hochella, M. F.; Ilton, E. S. Dynamic
processes occurring at the Cr(III) manganite (-MnOOH) interface:
Simultaneous adsorption, microprecipitation, oxidation/reduc
tion, and dissolution. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2002, 66(23),
4119-4132. [ChemPort] [CrossRef]
41. Jardine P. M.; Taylor D. L. Kinetics and mechanisms of
Co(II)EDTA oxidation by pyrolusite. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta
1995, 59(20), 4190-4203.
42. Scott, M. J.; Morgan, J. J. Reactions at oxide surfaces. 1.
Oxidation of As(III) by synthetic birnessite. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 1995, 29, 1898-1905. [ChemPort]
43. Scott, M. J.; Morgan J. J. Reactions at oxide surfaces. 2.
Oxidation of Se(IV) by synthetic birnessite. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 1996, 30, 1990-1996.[Full text - ACS] [ChemPort]
44. Wan, J.; Tokunaga, T. K.; Brodie, E.; Wang, Z.; Zheng, Z.;
Herman, D.; Hazen, T. C.; Firestone, M. K.; Sutton, S. R.
Reoxidation of bioreduced uranium under reducing conditions.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 59, 6162-6169.
45. McCubbin, D.; Leonard, K. S. A preliminary study to assess
the effect of some seawater components on the speciation of
plutonium. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 1993, 172(2), 363-370.
[ChemPort]
*****************************************************************
61 NEWS.com.au: The sensible energy alternative is within our grasp -
By Julie Bishop
June 05, 2006
CONSIDER the following: a 500MW coal-fired power station
produces almost 320,000 tonnes of toxic waste while a comparable
nuclear power station produces about 20 tonnes per annum. The
coal-fired facility will release into the atmosphere 4.38
million tonnes of carbon dioxide while the nuclear power station
will release 87,600 tonnes. The coal waste will include 2.6
tonnes of uranium and 6.4 tonnes of thorium.
These are just a few of the facts that must be injected into
the debate on nuclear power being urged by Prime Minister John
Howard. International experience demonstrates that properly
constructed and operated nuclear power stations are clean, safe
and efficient. Nuclear generated electricity presents the most
practical prospect for satisfying the 50 per cent increase in
world energy demand between now and 2030 predicted by the
International Energy Agency.
A range of considerations including energy security, economics,
environmental issues and safety support the widespread adoption
of nuclear fission as an energy source.
Several large industrialised nations use nuclear power to
generate a substantial proportion of their electricity
requirements. They include France, 78 per cent; Sweden, 50 per
cent; South Korea, 40 per cent; Germany, 28 per cent and Japan,
25 per cent. Currently there are 440 nuclear reactors in
operation throughout the world, 30 under construction, 30
undergoing licensing and about 60 in the planning stage.
Nuclear power's clean and green credentials are beyond dispute.
Compared with practical alternatives, nuclear power makes only a
small contribution to greenhouse gases. During construction it
produces some greenhouse gases - like other technologies - but
little during operation. The nuclear power plants operating
throughout the world each year save greenhouse gas emissions
equivalent to 600 million tonnes of carbon. They make a
contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions comparable
with that of hydro-electricity.
In addition to its minimal carbon dioxide emissions, nuclear
power does not produce the methane, sulphur dioxide or nitrogen
oxide emissions of coal-fired electricity production. Nor does
it require the extensive areas of land that are needed to
produce large amounts of energy through renewable technologies
such as wind or solar power.
Nuclear power produces a relatively small volume of waste, which
can be effectively isolated from people and the environment. In
France, which produces almost 80 per cent of its electricity from
nuclear reactors, the annual production of high-level radioactive
waste is less than 10g a person each year. Compare this with
100kg a person each year of toxic chemical waste that coal-fired
power generation would produce.
The technologies for management of low and intermediate level
radioactive wastes have been demonstrated at many facilities
throughout the world. The technologies already exist for
disposal of the high-level radioactive wastes from nuclear power
stations in deep geological formations. Projects to develop such
deep repositories have already begun. Contrary to the views of
nuclear opponents, safe management of radioactive wastes does
not depend on some long-awaited technical breakthrough.
Nuclear power has proven to be the safest of the large energy
production systems. The results of expert comparative safety
studies show that nuclear power is 10 times safer than
hydro-electricity, the next safest large-scale energy production
technology. Nuclear is 100 times safer than oil, natural gas and
coal-fired electricity production, and 1000 times safer than
systems based on liquid petroleum gas.
There have been more than 12,000 operational years of nuclear
power reactor operation during which there has been one nuclear
accident - Chernobyl in the Ukraine - which has resulted in loss
of life. It is widely recognised that the Chernobyl accident was
the result of a flawed reactor design, operated by inadequately
trained staff with little regard for safety. The Three Mile
Island accident in the US resulted in no adverse health or
environmental consequences, despite severe damage to a reactor.
While the causes of the Chernobyl accident are mostly confined
to circumstances unique to the operation of nuclear facilities
in the former Soviet Union, this accident has prompted an even
greater international focus on nuclear safety. New advanced
reactor designs include inherent safety features which require
no active controls or operational intervention to avoid
accidents.
The latest nuclear reactor designs are also more economic to
construct and operate. There is strong evidence they are
competitive with coal and gas-fired electricity generation,
without adjustments for the cost of carbon emissions. For
example, the cost of power from the advanced reactor to be
constructed at Flamanville in France is projected by Electricite
de France to be competitive with an advanced gas-fired plant
based on current gas prices, without consideration of carbon
taxes.
The cost competitiveness of new nuclear power technologies has
also been demonstrated in studies conducted in Finland, the US,
Japan and Britain. Recent studies conducted on behalf of the
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation have
shown that in Australia nuclear power could be cost competitive
with coal generation, even without considering the cost of
carbon emissions.
As a responsible supplier of uranium to the world, Australia
must consider seriously the growing body of evidence that
demonstrates nuclear power is the most convincing response to
the stability of the global environment and human health
presented by greenhouse gas emissions.
Julie Bishop is Minister for Education, Science and Training,
with portfolio responsibility for the Australian Nuclear Science
and Technology Organisation.
*****************************************************************
62 MSNBC: DOE eyes new Duke City facility for nuke agency -
Albuquerque - MSNBC.com
By Abby Roedel New Mexico Business Weekly
An agency within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is looking
seriously at building a new facility in Albuquerque that could
accommodate hundreds of government employees in more than
300,000 square feet of space.
The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Service
Center, located at Kirtland Air Force Base, is evaluating its
leasing and building possibilities in the area, says Al Stotts,
a spokesperson for the NNSA.
The Service Center currently employs 665 people and Stotts says
that if a new facility is built, he does not expect that any
more jobs would be added.
On May 19, a pre-solicitation notice was submitted on the
federal Web site FedBizOpps.gov, which operates as "the single
government point-of-entry (GPE) for federal government
procurement opportunities over $25,000," according to the site.
The notice sought expressions of interest for a
306,949-square-foot construction project that would include "a
mix of office and high-bay, light industrial space." The General
Services Administration (GSA), a federal agency that essentially
acts like a middle man for other federal entities to assist with
their contracting needs, submitted the notice. GSA said in the
notice that a site had been identified, but "the assignable
purchase option is being negotiated by the government." The
lease term would be 20 years firm.
While the potential requirements for a new facility have been
made public, Stotts says the evaluation process is still very
preliminary, as formal approval from NNSA headquarters in
Washington, D.C., is required before any further action can be
taken.
A pre-solicitation notice is generally meant to drum up interest
for the project before a formal request for proposal, or RFP,
goes out.
"It could mean more bids, more competition and a better overall
benefit for the government," says Shala Geer-Smith, a GSA
spokesperson. Should an RFP for a construction project be
issued, Geer-Smith says it would request that a developer or
contractor build and own the facility and then GSA would lease
it on behalf of the DOE.
The NNSA Service Center at Kirtland provides business,
technical, financial, legal and management advice and services
to the NNSA, a semi-autonomous agency within the DOE, explains
Stotts. The NNSA is responsible, in part, for maintaining the
safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile
without nuclear testing, he adds.
Among the other requirements detailed in the pre-solicitation
notice are secured parking spaces for more than 800 personnel
and a minimum 100-foot setback from public roads, drives and
parking.
"They've got to be looking at Mesa del Sol. You're probably
talking about a 15 to 20 acre parcel and that just doesn't exist
in places like the north I-25 corridor," says Scott
Throckmorton, president of Argus Investment Realty. Mesa del Sol
officials declined comment on the project.
Should the NNSA decide on an existing facility, Throckmorton
says the only building capable of accommodating that kind of
space is the 500,000-square-foot former Philips Semiconductor
facility between Alameda and Tramway NE.
But, if the federal agency pursues plans for a new building,
Throckmorton estimates that at least three to four dozen
development groups would be interested in a project of that
magnitude.
MSNBC.com
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************