*****************************************************************
09/25/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.227
*****************************************************************
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] Will Israel Threaten Iran with Its Own Nukes?
2 ISRAEL SEEN LIFTING NUCLEAR VEIL OVER IRAN
3 [NYTr] Bush Regime Itching to Nuke Iran?
4 [NYTr] No Unilateral Attack on Iran? Don't Be So Sure...
5 AFP: Iran nuclear chief in Moscow for talks on Bushehr -
6 AFP: Iran warns it can finish nuclear plant without Russia -
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Minister: Nuclear Talks 'On Track'
8 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Cruise missile draws threats
9 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: North prepares to refine more plutonium
10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Thinking the unthinkable - Korean War II
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Red-faced media retracts reports
12 BBC: North Korea 'makes weapon pledge'
13 RADIO FREE EUROPE: South Korea, Uzbekistan Sign Uranium Deal -
14 Korea Times: Misreport on Nukes Damages Dailies
15 AFP: Armitage expects North Korean nuclear test before year-end -
16 AFP: NKorea raps 'bat-blind', boot-licking Japan over sanctions -
17 US: Summit Daily News: Forecasts vary on future of energy
18 IPS-English ENVIRONMENT: Dangerous Nuclear Hangover To Go
19 Guardian Unlimited: Clarke questions renewal of Trident
20 The Age: It's clean and it's green, but Howard isn't interested in i
21 BBC: Showcase pipeline fuels global gas flames
22 BBC: Russia in European energy pledge
23 BBC: UK firms 'worry over energy cost'
24 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Hosseini regrets IAEA failure
25 AFP: Israeli PM, top Saudi figure met recently - report -
26 Guardian Unlimited: Report: Olmert Met Secretly With Saudi
27 UPI: Analysis: The wages of spin
28 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Pursues Closer Ties With Kazakhstan
NUCLEAR REACTORS
29 US: [NukeNet] 2 oyster creaky articles; terror target? and NRC
30 US: NRC: NRC Issues Order Barring Individual from Involvement in NRC
31 HindustanTimes.com: Atomic energy panel to scrutinise nuclear deal
32 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Country Affirms Interest for Nuclear Technol
33 US: NRC: Notice of Opportunity To Comment on Model Application on
34 Rediff: US Business Council batting for nuclear deal
35 US: NRC: Omaha Public Power District Notice of Withdrawal of Applica
36 BBC: Concern over Middle East nuclear plans
37 RosBusinessConsulting: Rosenergoatom to become joint-stock company
38 GAZETA.KZ: All nuclear programmes should be transparent and controll
39 Slovenia Business Week: Experts Debate Future of Nuclear Energy at P
40 PDM: IAEA commissioner falls into water tank at Czech nuclear plant
41 THISDAY ONLINE: Nigeria Affirms Interest for Nuclear Technology
42 Bellona: Russian state nuke power plant builder to go private next y
43 US: PRN: Nearly 7 of 10 Americans Favor Nuclear Energy, Support Buil
44 UPI: Analysis: Nuke power may spread in Mideast
45 Guardian Unlimited: Man Pleads in Russia Nuclear Cash Case
NUCLEAR SECURITY
46 ITAR-TASS: Russian Upper House ratifies Convention Against Nuc Terro
NUCLEAR SAFETY
47 Global impact of depleted uranium - diabetes pandemic and
48 [NukeNet] State wildlife biologists are trying to find out
49 US: reviewjournal.com: Test site workers' records dumped
50 US: UPI: Anti-radiation treatment studies funded
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
51 US: AFP: Aussie PM rejects India plea for uranium, but signals chang
52 US: The Age: Howard signals option of uranium sales to India -
53 US: Journal Gazette: Uranium demand booming
54 US: TCV: Nuclear Waste Disposal Issue Unresolved
55 reviewjournal.com: EDITORIAL: Buying support for Yucca Mountain
56 US: CNW Group: Trigon Acquires Second Large-Scale Utah Uranium Proje
57 US: WA Business News: Western Uranium float to cash in on uranium bo
58 US: Rapid City Journal: Uranium mine study focus of meeting
59 US: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Radioactive ash: Time to get moving -
60 UPI: Serbia to relocate nuclear waste to Russia
PEACE
61 AU ABC: Alice council petitioned to declare nuclear-free zone
62 GAZETA.KZ: Can Central Asia become a nuclear-free zone?
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
63 DOE: USDA-DOE Announce More Speakers for National Renewable Energy C
64 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Idaho National Lab replaces nuclear chie
65 Hanford News: HAMMER to open its doors Friday
66 Hanford News: Idaho National Lab replaces nuclear chief with few exp
67 Las Vegas SUN: Former clerk says Nevada Test Site documents were bur
68 Idaho Statesman: INL replaces nuclear chief
69 KnoxNews: Cleanup of old reactor to resume
70 lamonitor.com: LANL helps reduce plutonium stocks
71 PRN: Chevron and Los Alamos National Laboratory Launch Research
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Will Israel Threaten Iran with Its Own Nukes?
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:32:08 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
[The strange opaque headline means that when Israel wanted more US weapons
in 1973, it subtly let the US know that it might be prepared to nuke its
enemies. And they might be ready to do the same thing again, this time
against Iran. -NY Transfer]
Reuters via Yahoo - Sep 25, 2006
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/060925/3/43n6v.html
Israel Seen Lifting Nuclear Veil over Iran
TEL AVIV (Reuters) - In October 1973, with its forces battling to repel
invasions by Egypt and Syria, Israel did what had previously been
unthinkable: It briefly wheeled its nuclear-capable Jericho-1 missiles out
of their secret silos.
That, historians believe, was picked up by U.S. spy satellites and stirred
up fears in Washington of a catastrophic flare-up between the Jewish state
and the Soviet-backed Arabs. Message received, an urgent American shipment
of conventional arms to Israel was quick to follow, and helped turn the
war.
With Israel's current arch-foe Iran seen gaining the ability to produce
nuclear weapons within a few years, and preventive military options
limited, some experts now anticipate another "lifting of the veil" on the
assumed Israeli atomic arsenal.
Were that to happen, experts say, the objective would be to establish a
more open military deterrence vis-a-vis Iran and perhaps win Israel's
nuclear option formal legitimacy abroad.
"No one should simply assume that Israel would stay where it is now with
its ambiguous capability if Iran becomes a nuclear power," said Professor
Gerald Steinberg, head of the Conflict Management Programme at Bar-Ilan
University near Tel Aviv.
"Israeli policy is likely to change, in order to demonstrate that the
country has continued strategic superiority," he said.
Israel neither confirms nor denies it has the Middle East's only nuclear
weapons, under an "ambiguity" policy billed as warding off enemy states
while avoiding a regional arms race.
Steinberg said this might be abandoned only as a last resort to persuade a
nuclear-armed Iran that it stood to suffer far greater devastation in any
full-blown future conflict.
"It's not desirable, but this is about survival," he said.
Iran, the world's fourth largest oil exporter, says its nuclear programme
is for energy needs alone. But calls by its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
for Israel to be "wiped off the map" have fuelled Western calls for the
programme to be curbed.
MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION?
Talk of a nuclear stand-off between Israel and Iran has sparked
comparisons with the "mutually assured destruction" formula that reigned
during the Cold War and, more recently, between India and Pakistan.
But those precedents assume a parity that may not exist with Israel and
Iran. Militarily advanced Israel is geographically small and vulnerable.
Iran's atomic ambitions are at fledgling stage but its large size could
help it survive a major strike.
"The use of a nuclear bomb against Israel would completely destroy Israel,
while (the same) against the Islamic world would only cause damage. Such a
scenario is not inconceivable," former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi
Rafsanjani said in a 2001 speech.
There is also speculation that Ahmadinejad might welcome an apocalyptic
confrontation, meaning the idea of a deterrent would not work. Yet he
answers to Iranian clerics who work by committee and thus provide a
rational set of safeguards.
Reuven Pedatzur, defence analyst for the respected Israeli daily Haaretz,
proposed that the country, under U.S. guidance, go public with its nuclear
capability in the hope of building back-channel ties with Iran and
establishing mutual deterrence.
"Israel cannot continue to rely on it (ambiguity policy) if Iran has
nuclear weapons. This is because ambiguity leaves too many grey areas. The
enemy cannot know with certainty what the red lines are and when he is
risking an Israeli nuclear response," he wrote.
"There must be a deterrent policy that will leave no room for
misunderstandings," he added. "Thus, for example, we would make it clear
that the identification of any missile launched from Iran in a westerly
direction means, as far as we are concerned, the launch of an Iranian
nuclear missile at us."
Declaring capabilities is one way for a nation to becomes an official
nuclear power. The other is a controlled atomic blast.
"If the Israelis really have any doubt about the credibility of their
deterrence, they could conduct a nuclear test, say, in the Negev desert,"
said Gary Samore, a former adviser on nuclear non-proliferation in the
U.S. National Security Council under President Bill Clinton.
But he said the diplomatic fall-out of such a move would draw scrutiny
away from Tehran and further alienate those Arab nations willing to
endorse Western pressure on the Iranians.
"It would be a godsend for Iran," Samore said.
NPT IN QUESTION
Israel did not sign the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It thus
kept its main nuclear facility, outside the desert town of Dimona, exempt
from inspection. It has received billions of dollars in aid from
Washington, whose laws ban funding states with unregulated
non-conventional arsenals.
A nuclear weapons test by Israel would effectively blow away that U.S.
blind eye. Iran, in turn, could withdraw from the NPT and argue that it
should not be subjected to sanctions. After that, other Middle East states
would likely seek atomic arms.
Avner Cohen, author of the seminal study "Israel and the Bomb", has
suggested that Israel seek to form a new nuclear pact along with India and
Pakistan, which refuse to join the NPT.
"Such a protocol might permit them to retain their atomic programmes, but
inhibit further development. It could also require cooperation with
international nuclear export controls, prohibit explosive testing of
nuclear devices, and call for the phased elimination of fissile material
production," Cohen said.
Iran would not be able to join such a pact, he added, as it has violated
the NPT by pursuing unauthorised nuclear projects.
Cohen poured cold water on the idea of Israel seeking mutual deterrence
with a nuclear-armed Iran, noting that during the Cold War parity was
achieved only after Washington and Moscow scraped through two crises --
over the 1948 Western airlift to Berlin and the 1962 deployment of Soviet
missiles in Cuba.
"The sense of stability associated with mutually assured destruction grew
out of a learning curve," he said. "Israel had its learning through
crisis, especially the 1973 war. Do we have time for the Iranians to
learn? Will they learn?"
*
================================================================
.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 ISRAEL SEEN LIFTING NUCLEAR VEIL OVER IRAN
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 11:58:13 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/060925/3/43n6v.html
Agence France Presse Monday September 25,
TEL AVIV (Reuters) - In October 1973, with its forces battling to repel
invasions by Egypt and Syria, Israel did what had previously been
unthinkable: It briefly wheeled its nuclear-capable Jericho-1 missiles out
of their secret silos.
That, historians believe, was picked up by U.S. spy satellites and stirred
up fears in Washington of a catastrophic flare-up between the Jewish state
and the Soviet-backed Arabs. Message received, an urgent American shipment
of conventional arms to Israel was quick to follow, and helped turn the
war.
With Israel's current arch-foe Iran seen gaining the ability to produce
nuclear weapons within a few years, and preventive military options
limited, some experts now anticipate another "lifting of the veil" on the
assumed Israeli atomic arsenal.
Were that to happen, experts say, the objective would be to establish a
more open military deterrence vis-a-vis Iran and perhaps win Israel's
nuclear option formal legitimacy abroad.
"No one should simply assume that Israel would stay where it is now with
its ambiguous capability if Iran becomes a nuclear power," said Professor
Gerald Steinberg, head of the Conflict Management Programme at Bar-Ilan
University near Tel Aviv.
"Israeli policy is likely to change, in order to demonstrate that the
country has continued strategic superiority," he said.
Israel neither confirms nor denies it has the Middle East's only nuclear
weapons, under an "ambiguity" policy billed as warding off enemy states
while avoiding a regional arms race.
Steinberg said this might be abandoned only as a last resort to persuade a
nuclear-armed Iran that it stood to suffer far greater devastation in any
full-blown future conflict.
"It's not desirable, but this is about survival," he said.
Iran, the world's fourth largest oil exporter, says its nuclear programme
is for energy needs alone. But calls by its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
for Israel to be "wiped off the map" have fuelled Western calls for the
programme to be curbed.
MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION?
Talk of a nuclear stand-off between Israel and Iran has sparked
comparisons with the "mutually assured destruction" formula that reigned
during the Cold War and, more recently, between India and Pakistan.
But those precedents assume a parity that may not exist with Israel and
Iran. Militarily advanced Israel is geographically small and vulnerable.
Iran's atomic ambitions are at fledgling stage but its large size could
help it survive a major strike.
"The use of a nuclear bomb against Israel would completely destroy Israel,
while (the same) against the Islamic world would only cause damage. Such a
scenario is not inconceivable," former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi
Rafsanjani said in a 2001 speech.
There is also speculation that Ahmadinejad might welcome an apocalyptic
confrontation, meaning the idea of a deterrent would not work. Yet he
answers to Iranian clerics who work by committee and thus provide a
rational set of safeguards.
Reuven Pedatzur, defence analyst for the respected Israeli daily Haaretz,
proposed that the country, under U.S. guidance, go public with its nuclear
capability in the hope of building back-channel ties with Iran and
establishing mutual deterrence.
"Israel cannot continue to rely on it (ambiguity policy) if Iran has
nuclear weapons. This is because ambiguity leaves too many grey areas. The
enemy cannot know with certainty what the red lines are and when he is
risking an Israeli nuclear response," he wrote.
"There must be a deterrent policy that will leave no room for
misunderstandings," he added. "Thus, for example, we would make it clear
that the identification of any missile launched from Iran in a westerly
direction means, as far as we are concerned, the launch of an Iranian
nuclear missile at us."
Declaring capabilities is one way for a nation to becomes an official
nuclear power. The other is a controlled atomic blast.
"If the Israelis really have any doubt about the credibility of their
deterrence, they could conduct a nuclear test, say, in the Negev desert,"
said Gary Samore, a former adviser on nuclear non-proliferation in the
U.S. National Security Council under President Bill Clinton.
But he said the diplomatic fall-out of such a move would draw scrutiny
away from Tehran and further alienate those Arab nations willing to
endorse Western pressure on the Iranians.
"It would be a godsend for Iran," Samore said.
NPT IN QUESTION
Israel did not sign the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It thus
kept its main nuclear facility, outside the desert town of Dimona, exempt
from inspection. It has received billions of dollars in aid from
Washington, whose laws ban funding states with unregulated
non-conventional arsenals.
A nuclear weapons test by Israel would effectively blow away that U.S.
blind eye. Iran, in turn, could withdraw from the NPT and argue that it
should not be subjected to sanctions. After that, other Middle East states
would likely seek atomic arms.
Avner Cohen, author of the seminal study "Israel and the Bomb", has
suggested that Israel seek to form a new nuclear pact along with India and
Pakistan, which refuse to join the NPT.
"Such a protocol might permit them to retain their atomic programmes, but
inhibit further development. It could also require cooperation with
international nuclear export controls, prohibit explosive testing of
nuclear devices, and call for the phased elimination of fissile material
production," Cohen said.
Iran would not be able to join such a pact, he added, as it has violated
the NPT by pursuing unauthorised nuclear projects.
Cohen poured cold water on the idea of Israel seeking mutual deterrence
with a nuclear-armed Iran, noting that during the Cold War parity was
achieved only after Washington and Moscow scraped through two crises --
over the 1948 Western airlift to Berlin and the 1962 deployment of Soviet
missiles in Cuba.
"The sense of stability associated with mutually assured destruction grew
out of a learning curve," he said. "Israel had its learning through
crisis, especially the 1973 war. Do we have time for the Iranians to
learn? Will they learn?"
*****************************************************************
3 [NYTr] Bush Regime Itching to Nuke Iran?
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 13:06:47 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Counterpunch - Sep 25, 2006
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts09252006.html
"Hugo Chavez might not have been too deep into hyperbole
when he described Bush as an example of demonic evil."
A Crisis Upon Us
Is the Bush Administration Itching to Nuke Iran?
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
A number of experts have concluded that despite the Bush administration's
desire to attack Iran, the aggression would be too rash and the
consequences too dire even for the irrational Bush administration.
Military experts point out that at a time when generals are calling for
more troops for Afghanistan and Iraq, it would be ill-advised for Bush to
add Iran to the war theater. Experts note that Iran is well armed with
missiles capable of attacking US ships and oil facilities throughout the
Middle East and that Iran can direct its Shiite allies in Iraq to assault
US troops there and set in motion terrorist actions throughout the Middle
East.
Diplomatic experts point out that the US is isolated in its desire for war
with Iran and has no ally except Israel, thus validating Muslim claims that
the US is Israel's instrument against Muslims in the Middle East. Experts
note that military aggression is a war crime and that US violations of
international law isolate the US and destroy the soft power on which US
leadership has been based. An attack on Iran could be the last straw for
Muslims chaffing under the rule of US puppet governments in Egypt,
Pakistan, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
Economic experts point out that the impact on the price of oil would be
severe and the economic consequences detrimental. With the US housing
bubble deflating, now is not the time for an oil shock.
It is difficult to take exception to this expert analysis. Nevertheless,
the Bush administration continues to send war signals. Credible news
organizations have reported that US naval attack groups have been given
"prepare to deploy orders" that would put them on station off Iran by
October 21.
How can Bush administration war plans be reconciled with expert opinion
that the consequences would be too dire for the US?
Perhaps the answer is that what appears as irrationality to experts is
rationality to neoconservatives. Neocons seek maximum chaos and instability
in the Middle East in order to justify long-term US occupation of the
region. Following this line of thought, neocons would regard the loss of a
US aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf as a way to solidify public support
for the war. US public anger at the Iranians could even result in US public
support for a military draft in order to win "the war on terror."
The Bush administration could bring Congress around by announcing a "Gulf
of Tonkin" incident or by orchestrating a "terrorist attack." However, this
is unnecessary as Bush has prepared the ground for bypassing Congress with
his propagandistic allegations that Iran, by arming Iraqi insurgents,
sponsoring terrorism, and building nuclear weapons, is the major part of
the ongoing "war against terrorism." Now that Iran is blamed for rising
violence in Iraq, an attack on Iran follows as a matter of course. All Bush
has to do is to continue with his lies in order to bring the American
public to a new war hysteria.
Bush's attorney general has demonstrated that he has no qualms about
validating any and all extra-legal powers that the White House requires for
violating the US Constitution and international law. The congressional
attempts to block illegal wiretapping and torture have failed. The Senate
has refused to authorize torture, but the Senate has not prevented the
administration from torturing detainees. The compromise leaves it to the
White House to decide whether its interrogation practices are
objectionable. In an editorial (September 22, 2006), the Washington Post
concluded that "the abuse can continue."
Polls show that Bush administration propaganda has convinced a majority of
inattentive Americans that Iran is making nuclear weapons. Polls show that
a majority support an attack on Iran under this circumstance. The
neoconservatives and their media allies have succeeded in causing the
public to confuse Iran's legal nuclear energy program with a weapons
program.
The International Atomic Energy Agency, whose inspectors pour over Iran's
nuclear energy program for signs of a weapons program, recently denounced a
House Intelligence Committee report as "outrageous and dishonest." Written
by the Republican neocon staff, the Republican report falsely alleges that
Iran had enriched uranium to weapons grade last April and that the IAEA had
removed a senior safeguards inspector to keep the alleged breach of the
Nuclear Non-proliferation Pact secret.
Once again neoconservatives have shown that they will tell any and every
lie to achieve their goal of attacking Iran. Jingoistic anti-UN Bush
supporters will automatically believe the neocon lie and will swallow
right-wing talk radio claims that the UN is protecting Iran's nuclear
weapons program. As we learned from the Iraq hysteria, facts and experts
are no impediment to the Bush administration's lies.
Rumsfeld's neocon Pentagon has rewritten US war doctrine to permit
preemptive nuclear attack on non-nuclear countries. As the US paid a huge
public relations cost in terms of world opinion and distrust of the US by
endorsing the first use of nuclear weapons, the revision of US war doctrine
must have a purpose.
Neocons claim that tactical nuclear weapons are necessary to destroy Iran's
underground facilities. However, the real reason for using nukes against
Iran is to intimidate Iran from retaliating and to threaten the entire
Muslim world with genocide unless Muslims bend to the neocons' will and
accept US hegemony over their part of the world.
In his speech to the United Nations, Hugo Chavez might not have been too
deep into hyperbole when he described Bush as an example of demonic evil.
[Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan
administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal
editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor
of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at:
paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com]
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
4 [NYTr] No Unilateral Attack on Iran? Don't Be So Sure...
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:43:23 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Mark Graffis (activ-l)
The Nation - Sep 21, 2006
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061009/lindorff
War Signals?
by DAVE LINDORFF
As reports circulate of a sharp debate within the White House over possible
US military action against Iran and its nuclear enrichment facilities, The
Nation has learned that the Bush Administration and the Pentagon have moved
up the deployment of a major "strike group" of ships, including the nuclear
aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate,
submarine escort and supply ship, to head for the Persian Gulf, just off
Iran's western coast. This information follows a report in the current issue
of Time magazine, both online and in print, that a group of ships capable of
mining harbors has received orders to be ready to sail for the Persian Gulf
by October 1.
As Time writes in its cover story, "What Would War Look Like?," evidence of
the forward deployment of minesweepers and word that the chief of naval
operations had asked for a reworking of old plans for mining Iranian harbors
"suggest that a much discussed--but until now largely theoretical--prospect
has become real: that the U.S. may be preparing for war with Iran."
According to Lieut. Mike Kafka, a spokesman at the headquarters of the
Second Fleet, based in Norfolk, Virginia, the Eisenhower Strike Group,
bristling with Tomahawk cruise missiles, has received orders to depart the
United States in a little over a week. Other official sources in the public
affairs office of the Navy Department at the Pentagon confirm that this
powerful armada is scheduled to arrive off the coast of Iran on or around
October 21.
The Eisenhower had been in port at the Naval Station Norfolk for several
years for refurbishing and refueling of its nuclear reactor; it had not been
scheduled to depart for a new duty station until at least a month later, and
possibly not till next spring. Family members, before the orders, had moved
into the area and had until then expected to be with their sailor-spouses
and parents in Virginia for some time yet. First word of the early dispatch
of the "Ike Strike" group to the Persian Gulf region came from several angry
officers on the ships involved, who contacted antiwar critics like retired
Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner and complained that they were being sent to
attack Iran without any order from the Congress.
"This is very serious," said Ray McGovern, a former CIA threat-assessment
analyst who got early word of the Navy officers' complaints about the sudden
deployment orders. (McGovern, a twenty-seven-year veteran of the CIA,
resigned in 2002 in protest over what he said were Bush Administration
pressures to exaggerate the threat posed by Iraq. He and other intelligence
agency critics have formed a group called Veteran Intelligence Professionals
for Sanity.)
Colonel Gardiner, who has taught military strategy at the National War
College, says that the carrier deployment and a scheduled Persian Gulf
arrival date of October 21 is "very important evidence" of war planning. He
says, "I know that some naval forces have already received 'prepare to
deploy orders' [PTDOs], which have set the date for being ready to go as
October 1. Given that it would take about from October 2 to October 21 to
get those forces to the Gulf region, that looks about like the date" of any
possible military action against Iran. (A PTDO means that all crews should
be at their stations, and ships and planes should be ready to go, by a
certain date--in this case, reportedly, October 1.) Gardiner notes, "You
cannot issue a PTDO and then stay ready for very long. It's a very
significant order, and it's not done as a training exercise." This point was
also made in the Time article.
So what is the White House planning?
On Monday President Bush addressed the UN General Assembly at its opening
session, and while studiously avoiding even physically meeting Iran's
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was also addressing the body, he offered
a two-pronged message. Bush told the "people of Iran" that "we're working
toward a diplomatic solution to this crisis" and that he looked forward "to
the day when you can live in freedom." But he also warned that Iran's
leaders were using the nation's resources "to fund terrorism and fuel
extremism and pursue nuclear weapons." Given the President's assertion that
the nation is fighting a "global war on terror" and that he is Commander in
Chief of that "war," his prominent linking of the Iran regime with terror
has to be seen as a deliberate effort to claim his right to carry the fight
there. Bush has repeatedly insisted that the 2001 Congressional
Authorization for the Use of Force that preceded the invasion of Afghanistan
was also an authorization for an unending "war on terror."
Even as Bush was making not-so-veiled threats at the UN, his former
Secretary of State, Colin Powell, a sharp critic of any unilateral US attack
on Iran, was in Norfolk, not far from the Eisenhower, advocating further
diplomatic efforts to deal with Iran's nuclear program--itself tantalizing
evidence of the policy struggle over whether to go to war, and that those
favoring an attack may be winning that struggle.
"I think the plan's been picked: bomb the nuclear sites in Iran," says
Gardiner. "It's a terrible idea, it's against US law and it's against
international law, but I think they've decided to do it." Gardiner says that
while the United States has the capability to hit those sites with its
cruise missiles, "the Iranians have many more options than we do: They can
activate Hezbollah; they can organize riots all over the Islamic world,
including Pakistan, which could bring down the Musharraf government, putting
nuclear weapons into terrorist hands; they can encourage the Shia militias
in Iraq to attack US troops; they can blow up oil pipelines and shut the
Persian Gulf." Most of the major oil-producing states in the Middle East
have substantial Shiite populations, which has long been a concern of their
own Sunni leaders and of Washington policy-makers, given the sometimes close
connection of Shiite populations to Iran's religious rulers.
Of course, Gardiner agrees, recent ship movements and other signs of
military preparedness could be simply a bluff designed to show toughness in
the bargaining with Iran over its nuclear program. But with the Iranian
coast reportedly armed to the teeth with Chinese Silkworm antiship missiles,
and possibly even more sophisticated Russian antiship weapons, against which
the Navy has little reliable defenses, it seems unlikely the Navy would risk
high-value assets like aircraft carriers or cruisers with such a tactic. Nor
has bluffing been a Bush MO to date.
Commentators and analysts across the political spectrum are focusing on
Bush's talk about dialogue, with many claiming that he is climbing down from
confrontation. On the right, David Frum, writing on September 20 in his
National Review blog, argues that the lack of any attempt to win a UN
resolution supporting military action, and rumors of "hushed back doors"
being opened in Washington, lead him to expect a diplomatic deal, not a
unilateral attack. Writing in the center, Washington Post reporter Glenn
Kessler saw in Bush's UN speech evidence that "war is no longer a viable
option" in Iran.
Even on the left, where confidence in the Bush Administration's judgment is
abysmally low, commentators like Noam Chomsky and Nation contributor Robert
Dreyfuss are skeptical that an attack is being planned. Chomsky has long
argued that Washington's leaders aren't crazy, and would not take such a
step--though more recently, he has seemed less sanguine about Administration
sanity and has suggested that leaks about war plans may be an effort by
military leaders--who are almost universally opposed to widening the Mideast
war--to arouse opposition to such a move by Bush and war advocates like
Cheney. Dreyfuss, meanwhile, in an article for the online journal
TomPaine.com, focuses on the talk of diplomacy in Bush's Monday UN speech,
not on his threats, and concludes that it means "the realists have won" and
that there will be no Iran attack.
But all these war skeptics may be whistling past the graveyard. After all,
it must be recalled that Bush also talked about seeking diplomatic solutions
the whole time he was dead-set on invading Iraq, and the current situation
is increasingly looking like a cheap Hollywood sequel. The United States,
according to Gardiner and others, already reportedly has special forces
operating in Iran, and now major ship movements are looking ominous.
Representative Maurice Hinchey, a leading Democratic critic of the Iraq War,
informed about the Navy PTDOs and about the orders for the full Eisenhower
Strike Group to head out to sea, said, "For some time there has been
speculation that there could be an attack on Iran prior to November 7, in
order to exacerbate the culture of fear that the Administration has
cultivated now for over five or six years. But if they attack Iran it will
be a very bad mistake, for the Middle East and for the US. It would only
make worse the antagonism and fear people feel towards our country. I hope
this Administration is not so foolish and irresponsible." He adds, "Military
people are deeply concerned about the overtaxing of the military already."
Calls for comment from the White House on Iran war plans and on the order
for the Eisenhower Strike Group to deploy were referred to the National
Security Council press office, which declined to return this reporter's
phone calls. McGovern, who had first told a group of anti-Iraq War activists
Sunday on the National Mall in Washington, DC, during an ongoing action
called "Camp Democracy," about his being alerted to the strike group
deployment, warned, "We have about seven weeks to try and stop this next war
from happening."
One solid indication that the dispatch of the Eisenhower is part of a force
buildup would be if the carrier Enterprise--currently in the Arabian Sea,
where it has been launching bombing runs against the Taliban in Afghanistan,
and which is at the end of its normal six-month sea tour--is kept on station
instead of sent back to the United States. Arguing against simple rotation
of tours is the fact that the Eisenhower's refurbishing and its dispatch
were rushed forward by at least a month. A report from the Enterprise on the
Navy's official website referred to its ongoing role in the Afghanistan
fighting, and gave no indication of plans to head back to port. The Navy
itself has no comment on the ship's future orders.
Jim Webb, Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan Administration and currently a
Democratic candidate for Senate in Virginia, expressed some caution about
reports of the carrier deployment, saying, "Remember, carrier groups
regularly rotate in and out of that region." But he added, "I do not believe
that there should be any elective military action taken against Iran without
a separate authorization vote by the Congress. In my view, the 2002
authorization which was used for the invasion of Iraq should not extend to
Iran."
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: Iran nuclear chief in Moscow for talks on Bushehr -
Monday September 25, 06:05 PM
[Sergei Kiriyenko (L) and Gholamreza Aghazadeh]
MOSCOW (AFP) - Top Iranian and Russian nuclear officials have
met to discuss plans for the completion of Iran's Bushehr power
plant as world powers groped for ways to ensure Tehran cannot
make nuclear weapons.
Gholamreza Aghazadeh, chief of Iran's nuclear energy agency, met
his Russian counterpart, Sergei Kiriyenko, and a Russian
spokesman told reporters that their talks would continue on
Tuesday.
The spokesman said the heads of the Russian and Iranian
companies involved in construction (Advertisement)
[ src=] of the Bushehr plant would meet separately and would
report to Aghazadeh and Kiriyenko Tuesday.
According to Russian news agency RIA Novosti, Aghazadeh told
Iranian journalists accompanying him to Moscow that Iran wanted
to take part in the work needed to bring the Bushehr plant
onstream.
The report provided no further details on what this would entail.
Before the Moscow talks began, Iranian officials said in Tehran
that the meetings were aimed at finalizing plans for delivery of
nuclear fuel and the startup of the Bushehr plant, now scheduled
for November 2007.
"We are going to discuss ways to remove existing obstacles by
quickly completing the Bushehr atomic plant and also we are
going to agree the time of inauguration and sending the fuel,"
Aghazadeh's deputy, Mohammad Saeedi, told the Iranian state news
agency IRNA.
Saeedi complained that Russia had not followed through on
commitments made last year on schedules for delivery of nuclear
fuel from Russia to Iran, fuel that must be shipped and
installed around six months before the plant can go online.
Though Russia is helping Iran build the Bushehr station, Moscow
has been under heavy pressure, notably from the United States,
to suspend or slow its nuclear cooperation with the Islamic
republic, which Washington accuses of trying to acquire the
means to build nuclear weapons.
Iran has consistently denied US charges that it is seeking
nuclear weapons, saying that its atomic ambitions are confined
strictly to producing energy and that it has the same right as
any country party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to
develop its own nuclear energy industry.
The Bushehr contract is worth about one billion dollars to
Russia.
Earlier this year, the United States ramped up diplomatic
pressure for Iran to halt its uranium enrichment activities or
face immediate and stiff international economic sanctions.
Russia and China, both of which have major economic interests in
Iran, rebuffed the US pressure and France has also proposed an
alternative plan aimed at alleviating concerns over Tehran's
nuclear ambitions.
French President Jacques Chirac last week called for more
negotiation with Tehran, using a press conference at the United
Nations in New York to say "dialogue must prevail" and that talk
of sanctions should be put off.
French officials have insisted that there is no difference
between Paris and Washington on Iran and French Foreign Minister
Philippe Douste-Blazy insisted Sunday that the nuclear issue was
approaching "the moment of truth".
In an effort to negate fears over Tehran's nuclear intentions --
which Moscow says it shares with the West -- Russian officials
forced a supplemental accord early last year under which all
spent nuclear fuel from the Bushehr plant would be returned to
Russia for reprocessing.
Sergei Novikov, a spokesman for Russia's atomic energy agency,
said last week that the Bushehr plant should be completed in
September 2007 and would begin producing energy two months after
that.
"Russia can deliver nuclear fuel to Iran next March, six months
before the launching of the station," Novikov said.
AFP
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: Iran warns it can finish nuclear plant without Russia -
by Victoria Loginova Mon Sep 25, 1:55 PM ET
MOSCOW (AFP) - Iran" /> pressed Russia to speed up work on a
nuclear power station it is building near the Gulf port of
Bushehr, warning that the Islamic republic was ready to complete
the work itself if necessary.
"In the event that the Russian contractor proves incapable of
completing the Bushehr project, Iran is ready to finish it
itself," the head of Iran's nuclear energy organization
Gholamreza Aghazadeh told Iranian journalists after Moscow talks.
"From our point of view, we can complete the power station
within six months," Aghazadeh told the semi-official Mehr news
agency, denying reports of an agreement with Russia for a
November 2007 completion date.
The Iranian envoy launched a strong attack on the competence of
Russian contractor Atomstroyexport which is building the power
plant but said Iran would continue to work with it for the time
being.
Before the Moscow talks began, Iranian officials said that the
meetings were aimed at finalizing plans for the delivery of
nuclear fuel and the startup of the Bushehr plant.
"We are going to discuss ways to remove existing obstacles by
quickly completing the Bushehr atomic plant and also we are
going to agree the time of inauguration and sending the fuel,"
Aghazadeh's deputy, Mohammad Saeedi, told Iran's official IRNA
news agency.
Saeedi complained that Russia had not followed through on
commitments made last year on schedules for delivery of nuclear
fuel, fuel that must be shipped and installed around six months
before the plant can go on stream.
Although Russia had a longstanding contract worth an estimated
one billion dollars to build the Bushehr reactor, it has been
under heavy US-led pressure to suspend or slow its cooperation
with the Islamic republic, which Washington accuses of trying to
develop a nuclear weapons capability.
Iran has consistently denied the US charges, saying that its
nuclear programme is solely for civilian energy purposes, a
right it says is enshrined in the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty.
Sergei Novikov, a spokesman for Russia's atomic energy agency,
said last week that the Bushehr plant should be completed in
September 2007 and would begin producing energy two months after
that.
"Russia can deliver nuclear fuel to Iran next March, six months
before the launching of the station," Novikov said.
A Russian spokesman said Aghazadeh would hold further talks with
his Russian counterpart, Sergei Kiriyenko, Tuesday.
The United States has been leading calls at the United Nations"
/> for the Security Council to take enforcement action against
Iran after it failed to heed an end of August deadline to halt
uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for reactors
or, in extended form, the core of an atom bomb.
Russia and China, both of which have major economic interests in
Iran, have rebuffed the US pressure, and France too has demanded
that more talks be held to provide the assurances being sought
by the international community that the Islamic republic's
nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only.
In an effort to assuage Western concerns, Russia early last year
secured Iran's agreement to an amendment of the Bushehr deal
requiring that all spent nuclear fuel from the reactor be
returned to Russia for reprocessing.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Minister: Nuclear Talks 'On Track'
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday September 25, 2006 9:01 PM
AP Photo XNY702
By EDITH M. LEDERER and SCHEHEREZADE FARAMARZI
Associated Press Writers
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Iran's foreign minister said Monday that
talks between top Iranian and European negotiators on his
country's disputed nuclear program are ``on track'' and he
believes a negotiated solution to the standoff is possible.
Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told The Associated Press
that he expects European Union foreign policy chief Javier
Solana and Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani to hold
their third meeting ``very soon,'' probably in Europe, though he
didn't have an exact date or location.
The two officials had been expected to meet in New York on the
sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly ministerial meeting that
began last week, but Mottaki said it wasn't possible because
Larijani's deputy and members of his delegation weren't given
U.S. visas.
``But the last two or three days, they have been in contact and
they are coordinating,'' the Iranian minister said in an
exclusive interview. ``I think very soon they will have the next
round of discussions.''
Mottaki said ``there was good connection between the two sides''
after Iran responded on Aug. 22 to a package of incentives from
six key nations for Iran if it suspends uranium enrichment. He
added that after the first two rounds of talks, Larijani and
Solana ``mentioned jointly that it was positive, constructive
and another step forward.''
Six key nations trying to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions -
Britain, France, Germany, the United States, France and Russia -
are hoping Tehran will agree quickly to suspend uranium
enrichment after it missed an Aug. 31 deadline and return to
negotiations, but they are planning for sanctions if it does
not.
``We do believe that case has gone once again on track. ... All
the parties should support and make a commitment to support the
negotiations and generally I believe there are possibilities to
reach a comprehensive solution based on negotiations for both
parties,'' Mottaki said.
The U.N. Security Council set an Aug. 31 deadline for Iran to
suspend enrichment or face mild initial sanctions. It urged the
Iranian government to respond positively to a package of
incentives put forward in June by the six parties. Iran
responded in a lengthy document that raised many questions.
The six parties let the deadline slip after Solana described his
initial meeting with Larijani as ``constructive.''
Oil-rich Iran says it needs uranium enrichment to produce fuel
for nuclear reactors that would generate electricity and insists
its program is peaceful. Enrichment can also create material for
atomic bombs, however, and the United States and other nations
have accused Tehran of seeking to develop atomic weapons.
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said for the first time at
a press conference Thursday that Iran is prepared to negotiate
the suspension of its enrichment activities ``under fair and
just conditions.''
Asked what those conditions are, Mottaki laughed and said:
``Justice is the main element in foreign policy, particularly in
the new government's approach to either domestic or
international issues and problems.''
``That's why he does believe that any condition, any questions,
any decision should be based on justice,'' Mottaki said.
How does he define justice?
``Yes, in its convenient time, we will explain. I'm sorry,'' the
foreign minister said.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
8 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Cruise missile draws threats
September 26, 2006 KST
September 25, 2006 ¤Ñ Pyongyang complained Saturday that the
development of a medium-range cruise missile by Seoul was a
"provocative act" and a military threat, and could plunge the
Korean Peninsula into a nuclear war.
Posted on Uriminzokkiri, a Web site operated by the Committee
for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland, the Kim
Jong-il regime said, "This is a very risky provocation and a
criminal act that draws the whole nation into the abyss of a
nuclear war." It accused the South's military of having
developed the weapon with the intention of attacking the North.
Last week, an official with the South Korean Defense Ministry
said that a newly developed cruise missile with a range of 500
kilometers (300 miles) could target North Korean missile bases
near the border with China and other strategic targets. The
range of the missile, Seoul said, would be doubled within the
next five years. The cruise missiles would be fitted onto new
South Korean submarines as well.
by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc.
*****************************************************************
9 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: North prepares to refine more plutonium
September 26, 2006 KST 13:18 (GMT+9)
September 25, 2006 ¤Ñ A U.S. scholar with close ties to the
leadership in Pyongyang said in Beijing on Saturday that North
Korea planned to unload fuel rods from a nuclear reactor to
extract additional weapons-grade plutonium.
Selig Harrison, the director of the Asia program at the Center
for International Policy in Washington, has developed
extraordinary access there for a Westerner.
Mr. Harrison told reporters after returning from Pyongyang that
Kim Gye-gwan, Pyongyang's negotiator at the stalled six-nation
talks on North Korean nuclear programs, told him of North
Korea's plans to obtain additional nuclear weapons material. Mr.
Harrison suggested that the intent was to push the United States
for direct bilateral negotiations on those programs, a
long-standing desire of Pyongyang. Washington has demanded that
any meeting be "in the context of" the six-way negotiations.
The U.S. scholar said Mr. Kim told him the spent nuclear fuel
at a reactor at Yongbyon, north of Pyongyang, would probably be
unloaded this fall and certainly by the end of the year. The
North last removed the reactor's fuel in June 2005.
He said Mr. Kim declined to comment on whether Pyongyang was
preparing a nuclear test, a possibility raised by intelligence
agencies who noted what they called unusual activity at a
possible testing site.
Separately, Christopher Hill, Washington's representative to
the six-party talks, told visiting Grand National Party
lawmakers over the weekend that Washington would not impose
additional sanctions against North Korea immediately. Instead, a
party official said, Mr. Hill described efforts to get other
countries to impose sanctions based on a resolution adopted by
the United Nations Security Council censuring North Korea for
its missile tests in July.
China's second-ranking diplomat, Wu Dawei, will visit Seoul on
Thursday, a Foreign Ministry official said yesterday.
Preparations for a possible meeting of the two nations' leaders
is on the agenda, along with North Korea.
by Brian Lee, Lee Sang-il africanu@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Thinking the unthinkable - Korean War II
September 25, 2006 ¤Ñ The transfer of wartime operational
control of South Korean troops back to Seoul has triggered a
heated debate as to whether South Korea is ready to take on the
responsibility.
The question is being answered mostly with the assumption that
the U.S. military ¡ª either in numbers called for by current
plans or in a somewhat smaller number ¡ª will come to the
defense of the South. But there is also another question, which
many defense analysts both in and out of the government seem
reluctant to discuss: How well do South Korean forces measure up
against North Korea's military machine one-on-one?
There is an often-heard adage that North Korea's troops are
underfed, lack sufficient training because of constraints on
fuel and ammunition and are equipped with Soviet-era weapons.
North Korea's defense budget in 2003 was $5 billion by a Defense
Ministry estimate, compared to Seoul's $21 billion last year. To
the extent that those estimates and assumptions reflect reality,
they underline the caution voiced by military experts here that
assessing the military balance on the Korean Peninsula is not
just a matter of counting cash, boots and artillery pieces.
There are many unknowables, analysts say, and only educated
guesses are possible.
Badly fed and undertrained on old equipment? "It's true," said
Kwon Tae-young of the Korea Research Institute For Strategy.
But, the researcher explained, there is another factor, often
cited by retired senior military officers here, that tends to
balance out those shortcomings. That factor is sheer numbers,
which some observers believe can make up for a lack of quality.
"Their experience and the sheer numbers alone make up for what
they lack in quality," Mr. Kwon said. "For instance, there is
probably less automation, but an artillery unit operated by
experienced soldiers is still deadly and they have many of
them." He cites examples in Germany, saying that after
reunification in 1989, West Germany inspected former East German
troops who were to be integrated into West Germany's forces.
Although the East was no economic match for the West, the
Westerners were surprised to see that their former adversaries'
equipment, although old, was well-maintained and fully
operational.
Mr. Kwon said that another balancing factor is the long
mandatory military service requirement in North Korea, whose
troops typically serve five to ten years in uniform, and even
longer for the North's special forces. The term of mandatory
military duty in the South is two years. That, he said, made the
average North Korean soldier the equal of a non-commissioned
officer here in terms of experience. Currently, the North fields
1.1 million troops against South Korea's 680,000. Seoul has a
3-million-strong reserve force, while North Korea's reserves
number 7.7 million.
Mr. Kwon estimated that based solely on conventional arms,
South Korea has about 85 percent of the combat ability of the
North; he says the republic's Air Force is at a par, the Navy
stands at 90 percent and the Army 80 percent of the North's
capabilities. He was using, he said, a formula in which weapons
and units are assigned a point value based on their perceived
combat effectiveness.
That, Mr. Kwon continued, would be adequate for South Korea to
defend itself effectively.
"If you trade space for time to gather your strength while
exhausting North Korean forces as they move deeper into South
Korean territory, and plan to deliver a knockout punch later
once sufficient force levels have been built up, what we have
now is enough," he said.
But that's probably not acceptable, he noted, because of an
inconvenient point of geography. Seoul, the nation's capital and
with its environs home to almost a quarter of the country's
population, sits only about 30 miles south of the Demilitarized
Zone. Trading Seoul for time would be a psychological as well as
economic blow, and a more active defense strategy would be
needed. Then, he said, the South would need a combat power
superiority of at least 50 or 100 percent over the North.
Another problem is what defense analysts delicately refer to as
"asymmetrical" warfare assets: nuclear and biochemical weapons
and missiles that can deliver at least the latter. Those wild
cards, Mr. Kwon said, throw any assessment of a military balance
into guesswork.
The Defense Ministry estimates Pyongyang's stockpile of
biochemical weapons at 2,500 to 5,000 tons, and believes North
Korea has one or two nuclear weapons, just as the United States
had when it used them against Japan to end World War II.
There is no such shortage of missiles in the North, however, as
Pyongyang demonstrated when it launched seven on July 5 in a
display that many analysts took as confirmation of those
weapons' operational readiness.
The arsenal consists of Scud missiles with a range of 300
kilometers (186 miles) to 500 kilometers and Rodong missiles
with a range of 1,300 kilometers. Those weapons can target all
of South Korea. Taepodong missiles, still not perfected, are
long-range weapons and could possibly reach the United States.
Yun Duk-min of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National
Security, a government defense institute, wrote in a paper
published in July that all of those missiles were capable of
carrying nuclear warheads and chemical and biological agents,
although there is skepticism among other analysts as to whether
North Korea's untested nuclear weapons have been made small
enough to fit on a missile.
And what strategy would Pyongyang use if it decided to launch
another attempt to unify Korea? A widely held belief among
military analysts is that Pyongyang would begin hostilities with
a surprise attack using a mix of conventional and special
operations, accompanied by a massive artillery and missile
barrage. The intent would be to end hostilities quickly and
decisively before U.S. reinforcements could be brought into play
or Seoul could mobilize fully. Defense Ministry estimates put
the total North Korean artillery at more that 13,500 pieces,
including multiple rocket launchers, compared to the 5,300
fielded by the South.
Yoon Kwang-ung, Seoul's defense minister, said recently that
southern forces had plans to counter the long-range artillery
threat from the North; military officials said that plan
involved unmanned aircraft with bomb racks and weapons attached.
Special forces figure large in North Korean plans. Infiltration
through tunnels, by air, land and by sea could involve as many
as 120,000 special warfare troops who would try to sow havoc
behind the lines.
James M. Minnich, a U.S. Army major, published "The North
Korean People's Army" last year. He concluded that Pyongyang's
strategy was based on the belief that a lightning strike would
dictate the "when" and "where" of battle, giving it a tactical
and psychological advantage and ending a war before the U.S.
military could intervene. In short, the author describes the
North's strategy as one "to deny opposing forces to reorganize
or reconstitute," adding that the use of special forces was a
lesson taken from Mao Zedong's guerrilla tactics in China's
civil war, when Mao's troops faced a superior enemy.
Coupled with Pyongyang's desire to occupy the fort before the
cavalry arrives, the disparity between the two Korea's economies
is another reason that a prolonged war would be out of the
question for North Korean generals.
The surprise element of a North Korean attack makes intelligence
capabilities crucial. Park Seung-boo, a retired major general
who served at the Combined Forces Command from 1994 to 1996,
said Seoul has some capabilities in tactical intelligence, but
relies almost entirely on the United States for strategic
intelligence.
Seoul wants to address those shortcomings by buying an unmanned
aircraft, the Global Hawk, from the United States. The drone can
be equipped with advanced cameras and cruise at more than 60,000
feet. That question will be on the agenda of bilateral security
talks with the United States next month, but a defense official
here called U.S. agreement to sell the aircraft "uncertain."
There have been reports that an earlier request along the same
lines had been rebuffed.
General Park said that if the military got the funds it needed
to put all its plans to modernize into effect, it would need
four or five years to ensure that the new systems meshed. But he
added that even then, some crucial intelligence functions, most
satellite reconnaissance and signals intelligence, would still
have to come from American eyes and ears.
The Korea Institute for Defense Analysis, a government
institution, has conducted its own analysis of the military
strength of the two Koreas this year, but citing the sensitivity
and classified nature of the work, researchers there declined
comment.
About the only Defense Ministry official who agreed to say
anything when asked bluntly which side was stronger refused to
comment on the record.
"It's hard to tell," he answered. "Certainly both sides believe
that they'll be the last man standing in a war, but we don't
want to put that to a test. I'm not sure we can say the same
thing of the North."
The official continued, "In the past, we have relied
psychologically on U.S. forces. Now we are trying to be more
independent but their presence is still a crucial part of our
security."
by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr>
by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Red-faced media retracts reports
September 26, 2006 KST 13:18 (GMT+9)
September 26, 2006 ¤Ñ Major morning newspapers in South Korea
were embarrassed yesterday after they reported about an American
expert's fictional essay on North Korea as if it were real.
At 11:17 p.m. on Sunday, Yonhap News Agency, one of the nation's
two news wire services, issued a report in Korean that Pyongyang
had developed at least five nuclear weapons, attributing the
quote to Kang Sok-ju, the North's first vice foreign minister,
from an essay by Robert Carlin, former chief of the Northeast
Asia Division at the U.S. State Department.
The report said Mr. Kang spoke about the weapons at a meeting
of North Korean diplomats in Pyongyang over the summer, citing
the essay posted on the U.S.-based think tank, Nautilus
Institute for Security and Sustainable Development. An
English-language article was aired eight minutes later.
Twelve related articles in Korean were aired during the
following hour.
The Dong-A Ilbo carried a large article on the front page. Other
major Korean-language daily newspapers, including the Chosun
Ilbo and Hankyoreh, reported stories inside their front section,
with headlines saying the North's vice foreign minister said his
country has several nuclear weapons.
The Korean-language JoongAng Ilbo, unable to reach Mr. Carlin
before its midnight deadline, issued a similar report on page 4,
with a remark from a South Korean senior official that he had
not been informed about Mr. Kang's discussion.
At 5:05 a.m., Yonhap News' Korean edition retracted all of its
stories based on the essay. About an hour later, the newswire's
English service issued a retraction, pointing out that "the
North Korean official's speech was found to be a fictional
composition by Robert Carlin."
Morning newspapers issued apologies and corrections yesterday
on their Internet sites.
The essay, titled "Wabbit in Free Fall," was posted on the
Policy Forum Online section of the Nautilus Institute's Internet
site. The think tank updated an introduction to the essay to
clarify the matter yesterday.
Before posting it on the Internet forum, Mr. Carlin also
presented the essay at a seminar on Sept. 14 and told attendees
that it was a hypothetical piece.
by Ser Myo-ja myoja@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
12 BBC: North Korea 'makes weapon pledge'
Last Updated: Saturday, 23 September 2006
[Yongbyon nuclear reactor, aerial image]
The US has been monitoring activity at North Korean nuclear sites
North Korea has said it plans to increase the amount of
plutonium it extracts for use in nuclear weapons, according to a
US scholar.
Selig Harrison said North Korean officials had told him they
would unload nuclear fuel rods from the Yongbyon reactor by the
year's end.
Mr Harrison said Pyongyang wants "to use Yongbyon as leverage"
to get bilateral talks with the US.
The US insists the nuclear issue can only be addressed in
six-party talks.
Pyongyang walked out of multilateral negotiations with the US,
China, Russia, Japan and South Korea late last year in protest
at US financial sanctions.
It had agreed to enter the talks when offered aid and security
guarantees in exchange for dismantling its nuclear programme.
International concern sparked by the North's recent missile
tests has been mounting with speculation that it may be planning
to test a nuclear bomb.
Nuclear fears
Selig Harrison told reporters in Beijing he had met several
North Korean officials on a recent trip to the country,
including the top nuclear negotiator, Kim Kye-gwan.
Mr Harrison is one of very few US academics with close contacts
with the North Korean government.
He said Mr Kim had told him the "purpose of unloading the fuel
was to obtain more plutonium for nuclear weapons".
He said he had been told the move was aimed at urging the US to
meet North Korea's demand for bilateral talks.
The US believes Pyongyang could be capable of producing two or
more bombs every year.
Intelligence reports of heightened activity at a suspected
underground site in North Korea have prompted reports that
Pyongyang might be planning a nuclear test.
Mr Harrison is quoted by the Associated Press news agency as
saying he believes the North Korean leadership is still debating
whether to conduct a test.
*****************************************************************
13 RADIO FREE EUROPE: South Korea, Uzbekistan Sign Uranium Deal -
www.rferl.org
Advanced
[South Korea -- South Korean president Rho Moo-hyun shakes
hands with Uzbekistan's President Karimov (L) during their
meeting at the Presidential Blue House in Seoul, 29 Mar. 2006]
South Korean President Rho Moo-hyun shakes hands with
Uzbekistan's President Islam Karimov at a meeting in Seoul in
March
(epa)
September 25, 2006 -- An official Uzbek news agency, UzA, reports
that the Uzbek and South Korean prime ministers have signed an
agreement to ship Uzbek uranium ore concentrate to South Korea.
The agency gives no further details. But its South Korean
counterpart, Yonhap, quoted officials traveling with Han as
saying the deal envisages that South Korea directly imports from
Uzbekistan 300 tons of uranium per year between 2010 and 2014.
Yonhap says the deal would constitute a precedent since South
Korea currently buys Uzbek uranium indirectly from U.S.
companies.
The deal is one of several agreed when South Korean Prime
Minister Han Myeong-sook met her Uzbek counterpart, Shavkat
Mirziyoev, in Tashkent on September 25. Han also met with
President Islam Karimov and parliament speaker Erkin Khalilov
The two also examined ways to boost Uzbek-South Korean ties in
the fields of energy, agriculture, construction, architecture,
and information technology.
UzA says trade between the two countries increased by nearly 40
percent last year, to $565 million.
(UzA, gov.uz, Yonhap)
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty © 2006 RFE/RL, Inc. All
Rights Reserved. Contact us: web@rferl.org
*****************************************************************
14 Korea Times: Misreport on Nukes Damages Dailies
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation
By Lee Jin-woo Staff Reporter
Reports by South Korean media that claimed North Korea has
developed at least five to six nuclear weapons have been found
out to be grossly inaccurate. The reports were based on an
alleged speech by a high-ranking North Korean official, which
was found to be a fictional composition by a U.S. expert on
North Korean issues.
Yonhap News Agency, a wire service in Seoul, reported Sunday
night that Kang Suk-ju, the North¡¯s first vice foreign
minister, told a meeting of North Korean diplomats in Pyongyang
that the North has developed five or six nuclear weapons and its
nuclear program is nearing the point of no return.
The series of news reports was based on an article recently
posted at the Web site of the U.S.-based think tank, the
Nautilus Institute, that was written by Robert Carlin, former
chief of the Northeast Asia Division at the U.S. State
Department.
In the article, Carlin said he received a hand-written script of
Kang¡¯s speech in an envelope postmarked Prague. He said he
translated the speech, originally in Korean, adding that he
could not say who sent it to him.
However, it was a fiction, which Yonhap reporters were not aware
of until getting a phone call from its correspondent in
Washington D.C. the very next day.
The wire service had posted some 13 reports including the
full-text of Kang¡¯s speech, which was also a fiction, since
11:17 p.m., Sunday.
Most South Korean newspapers as well as a few broadcasters
reported the story without verifying its veracity. Some dailies
even allocated three to four pages to analyze the meaning of the
speech.
``We had no time to find out the truth behind the story. It was
almost mid-night and we were under time pressure to finish the
production quickly,¡¯¡¯ a reporter of a vernacular daily told
The Korea Times. ``I feel ashamed. It clearly showed how
incompetent and irresponsible many Korean reporters are.¡¯¡¯
He added that the story had already been presented as a
fictional composition in a forum held in the United States
earlier this month, which South Korean reporters were not aware
of.
things@koreatimes.co.kr 09-25-2006 19:14
*****************************************************************
15 AFP: Armitage expects North Korean nuclear test before year-end -
Mon Sep 25, 5:25 AM ET
SEOUL (AFP) - Former US deputy secretary of state Richard
Armitage said that North Korea" /> may test a nuclear weapon by
the end of this year, sparking "huge international
ramifications."
"As a personal opinion I think you have an even chance of a
nuclear device detonation by the end of the year, and that in
the longer time it's more likely than not that North Korea will
detonate a nuclear device," he told a forum in the South Korean
capital Monday.
"I think in their logic it's the next rational escalation
point," Armitage said in response to a question from the
audience.
"Clearly, this will have huge international ramifications."
In response, Armitage said, he would expect US President George
W. Bush" /> to send Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> to
consult other countries involved in six-nation talks on North
Korea, and simultaneously to take the issue to the United
Nations" /> .
"I personally think that if North Korea were to do that (conduct
a test), then the United States should move more forces into the
area ... to make it clear to North Korea that each time they
provoke, they find themselves in a less advantageous military
situation."
The six-nation talks, involving the two Koreas, China, Japan,
Russia and the United States, are aim at persuading Pyongyang to
scrap its nuclear program in exchange for economic and
diplomatic benefits and security guarantees.
They have been suspended since November when the North boycotted
them in protest at US financial sanctions.
In July the communist state test-fired seven missiles and there
have been reports it is preparing a nuclear test.
North Korea declared in February 2005 that it had built nuclear
weapons but is not known to have conducted any tests.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
16 AFP: NKorea raps 'bat-blind', boot-licking Japan over sanctions -
Mon Sep 25, 3:09 AM ET
SEOUL (AFP) - North Korea" /> has renewed its strong attack
against Japan for announcing new sanctions against the communist
state, describing it as a "bat-blind", boot-licking "political
charlatan".
"Japan would be well advised to behave with discretion,
pondering over the serious consequences to be entailed by its
harebrained act against the DPRK (North Korea)," said Rodong
Sinmun, newspaper of the ruling communist party.
Japan last week blacklisted 15 companies and an individual with
alleged links to weapons programs in North Korea in compliance
with a UN resolution condemning Pyongyang's missile tests in
July.
The United States has urged its allies to tighten the financial
noose around North Korea, which is also in a standoff with the
international community over its nuclear ambitions.
In a trenchant commentary, Rodong Sinmun described the sanctions
as "poor, third-rate diplomacy of bat-blind philistines."
It added: "Japan is whipping itself into senseless frenzy to
please the whim of its American master...It does not warrant
surprise, considering that Japan has made it its physical
quality to lick the boots of the American master and tail behind
the US."
The commentary, carried by the official Korean Central News
Agency, described the sanctions as "disgusting behavior of a
slovenly political charlatan bent on refurbishing his public
image by ingratiating himself with his American master and
feathering his own nest by following the US."
The "clumsy and wicked act" trampled on the spirit and
requirements of the Pyongyang Declaration, it added.
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and the North's leader
Kim Jong-Il issued the declaration on establishing better
relations after a 2002 summit in Pyongyang.
But relations have soured since then, partly over the fate of
Japanese nationals kidnapped by North Korea in the 1970s and
1980s.
Pyongyang has returned five of the kidnap victims but Japan
insists that more are alive and being kept under wraps.
"It is justifiable and natural for the DPRK to put up a tough
rebuff to Japan's desperate political provocation. The situation
is very serious and the consequences are unpredictable," Rodong
Sinmun added.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
17 Summit Daily News: Forecasts vary on future of energy
for Breckenridge, Keystone, Copper and Frisco Colorado
September 25, 2006
BY NICOLE FREY eagle county correspondent September 24, 2006
BEAVER CREEK - While some of the world's leading geologists,
physicists and investment bankers are saying a decline in oil
production will soon change civilization as we know it, Scott
Tinker recently told the Vail Valley there is no energy crisis.
"We're never going to run out of oil," said Tinker, Texas' state
geologist, as well as the director of the Bureau of Economic
Geology at the University of Texas at Austin. "The Stone Age did
not end for lack of stones, and the oil age will not end for
lack of oil. We'll run out of ideas before we run out of oil."
Tinker and 15 others spoke about their views on energy in the
region, state and world during Forecast for the Future, an
energy forum hosted by the Vail Symposium last weekend at the
Vilar Center for the Arts in Beaver Creek.
Tinker said methane was forecast to run out in 1997. It didn't
happen, but the same tales of doom surround oil.
"We didn't quit using horses because we ran out of hay," Tinker
said. "Alaska is declining in production, but there's more
they're not using."
Compared with the stories of impending oil shortages commonly
heard, Tinker's words were comforting to some, ridiculous to
others.
"Sure, we'll just all go out and buy SUVs and not worry about
how much we're using," said one woman who attended Tinker's
speech, the first and longest of the bunch.
Much to her horror, Tinker also spoke up for oil companies.
"We all love to hate the oil companies," Tinker said. "But if
you want to see the environment get toasted and the economy in
recession, then we can get rid of the oil companies."
Colorado: Land of plenty
Tracy Boyd, who oversees sustainable practices at Shell Oil,
didn't exactly share Tinker's rosy outlook. While he doesn't
think the world's oil supply will dry up any day now, "Easy oil
is coming to an end," he said.
"We need to focus on other forms of energy and the
not-so-easy-to-find oil," he said.
In 140 countries, Shell is looking to other forms of energy,
from wind power to biofuel. In Colorado, Boyd is focused on the
Mahogany Oil Shale Research Project in Garfield and Mesa
counties. While Eagle County has little in the way of natural
resources, surrounding areas have abundant loads, especially of
oil shale, which isn't actually oil at all. Instead, oil shale
is limestone infused with an organic material.
Colorado also has copious amounts of uranium, a clean source of
fuel, according to Fletcher Newton, the CEO of Power Resources
Inc., a subsidiary of Cameco Corp., the largest uranium producer
in the United States. Unfortunately, the uranium is too
expensive to extract right now, he said.
Colorado also has abundant coal, a positive to some and not
others.
"There's a lot of coal in the world," Tinker said. "If it
weren't so dirty, it would be a great fuel."
But to Stuart Sanderson, the president of the Colorado Mining
Association, coal is an easy and cheap energy answer. It's also
getting cleaner as technology to liquefy and gasify coal is
developed, he said.
"Mining is in Colorado's history, and I hope it's part of the
future," he said.
Other options needed
But others are looking to kick out the old and bring in the new
for the country's own good. During "How many crises does it take
to install a solar panel?" Mark Bernstein, a political science
professor at the University of Southern California, said
Americans haven't changed their liberal oil consumption despite
increasing prices and low inventories.
"The connection between their own consumption and prices hasn't
been made," he said. "It might take a few more crises for people
to make any changes."
At the end of the day, there are no easy answers, all speakers
agreed.
"The only absolute is there's a lot of uncertainty for
businesses and consumers," Bernstein said.
All contents © Copyright 2006 summitdaily.com
Summit Daily - 40 West Main Street - Frisco, CO 80443
P.O. Box 329 · Frisco, CO 80443-0329
*****************************************************************
18 IPS-English ENVIRONMENT: Dangerous Nuclear Hangover To Go
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:43:07 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
ROMAIPS EU IP EN=20
ENVIRONMENT: Dangerous Nuclear Hangover To Go
By Vesna Peric Zimonjic
BELGRADE, Sep 25 (IPS) - A decision to send 2.5 tonnes of radioactive nuc=
lear rods back to Russia finally ends concerns over the presence of the n=
uclear waste near capital Belgrade.
=94We have finally neutralised the long-term danger,=94 Serbian Science M=
inister Aleksandar Popovic told reporters in Belgrade Monday. =94Vinca (1=
6km from Belgrade) will no longer be a threat to the environment, which w=
as our basic concern, as we inherited an issue that had been neglected fo=
r decades.=94
The Serbian minister spoke for the first time about Vinca in public after=
he signed an agreement last week with the International Atomic Energy Ag=
ency (IAEA) in Vienna.
The agreement provides for removal of the radioactive nuclear material ly=
ing at loosely guarded premises at the Nuclear Institute of Vinca, once t=
he pride of science in communist former Yugoslavia.
The packaging, removal and transportation to the country of origin will b=
e a daunting task that will cost 10 million dollars, the minister said. T=
he money has been provided by several donor countries, the minister said.
=94We hope that in the second half of 2008 the transportation will be ove=
r, and the Vinca issue as we know it now will be closed once and for all,=
=94 Popovic said.
About 8,000 highly radioactive rods remain in a basin of dirty water at V=
inca. The premises are fenced in by rusty barbed wire, and secured by onl=
y a few guards. The rods are made of plutonium and uranium.
The Vinca centre was founded in 1948 with the help of the former Soviet U=
nion. The nuclear material at the clandestine but ambitious project was e=
nough to build two atomic bombs at the time. No one knows who the bombs c=
ould have been used against or sold to.
After an accident in 1958 when a scientist died and five were injured in =
a radiation leak, the idea of a Yugoslav atomic bomb was put aside.
The two reactors then served as an education centre for physics students,=
but were finally closed down in 1984.
The media showed some interest in the decaying Vinca nuclear facility in =
1999 at the time of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) bombing=
of Serbia. Fears grew that any direct on the site could lead to serious =
radioactive contamination of large parts of Serbia.
Four years ago, some 48kg of highly enriched uranium fuel was removed fro=
m Vinca by the IAEA and the U.S., Russian and Serbian governments. The fu=
el was transported to a disposal facility near Dimitrovgrad in Russia.
Earlier this month the facility was back in the news when special program=
me manager at the IAEA Michael Durst said the Vinca site topped the globa=
l priority list of unsecured uranium sources because it combined =94the t=
hreats of nuclear proliferation and environmental disaster.=94
=94Vinca is unique in the amount of uranium stored within its facility an=
d the fact that about 30 percent of it is leaking,=94 Durst warned. =94It=
would be easily accessible to an organised group.=94 The IAEA said it co=
uld attract terrorists seeking to build a =94dirty=94 bomb.
Some experts say it is enough to tie a single fuel rod to conventional ex=
plosive to create a dirty bomb, which could scatter radioactive debris ac=
ross a wide area. But Serbian officials said this was possible only theor=
etically.
=94That is something impossible, not even supposed to be shown in James B=
ond movies,=94 Popovic told IPS.
His deputy Ivan Videnovic told IPS that =94even if someone entered the Vi=
nca premises to steal a rod, it would be lethally hazardous to take the m=
aterial away due to radiation, and impossible to smuggle it out of the co=
untry.=94
The installation became a priority for the IAEA because =94it contains th=
e largest amount of nuclear fuel exported from the former USSR, more than=
50 percent of it,=94 he added.
Videnovic said 17 similar installations exist in former communist countri=
es, and similar clearing exercises are now being carried out in Uzbekista=
n.
=94This is something inherited, decades old,=94 Popovic told IPS. =94But =
we have to solve the problems created by someone else, and the time is fi=
nally right to do so.=94 (END/IPS/EU/IP/EN/VZ/SS/06)
=20
=3D 09252021 ORP012
NNNN
*****************************************************************
19 Guardian Unlimited: Clarke questions renewal of Trident
Will Woodward, chief political correspondent
Monday September 25, 2006
The Guardian
The government has failed to make the case for renewing Britain's
nuclear deterrent, former cabinet minister Charles Clarke said
today.
Speaking at a Guardian debate at the Labour conference, Mr
Clarke, who was sacked as home secretary in May, fuelled the
debate that some members have accused the party leadership of
trying to curb. Both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have committed
themselves to replacing Trident at an estimated cost of £15-25bn,
although the Liberal Democrats claim it could cost more than
three times that once maintenance costs are taken into account.
"I'm not of the 'swords into ploughshares' persuasion, I think
the security risks that we face are very real in this country,"
Mr Clarke said. "I'm not convinced, however, that renewing
Trident is the best way to address those security risks that we
face, some 15 years down the line from where we are now. I don't
rule it out but I think the argument has not been made that needs
to be made very clearly. "The question about replacing Trident is
whether that is the best means of providing the security the
country is looking for. For me the core argument is not about the
money."
Two delegates, David Withers, from Birmingham Selly Oak and Rob
Bygraves, told the Guardian meeting that renewing nuclear
weapons made it much harder for Labour to reconnect with its
support. The party high command has refused to take a motion on
Trident on the floor of conference.
On Sunday three ministers, Hilary Benn, Peter Hain and Harriet
Harman, called for a full debate on the issue inside conference.
At the Guardian event, Jack Straw, the leader of the Commons,
said he supported multilateral, not unilateral, disarmament.
"We went through that argument 40-45 years ago and we went
through it again in the early 80s," he said. "It made damn sure
we couldn't get elected to do any of the things we cared about."
He added that the doctrine of mutually assured destruction could
help "in certain circumstances to calm the world".
Britain had done more than any other country under the terms of
the nuclear non-proliferation treaty to reduce its nuclear
weapons, and international agreement remained the best way to do
that, he said.
Mr Straw said ministers had to do more to bring public servants
with them.
"In reforming the public services we must not give the
impression - albeit mistaken - that we are involved in some kind
of permanent revolution."
The party had to reverse the "'I'm the lucky one' syndrome"
revealed by a recent Guardian poll, in which voters denied by a
large majority that people were better off, when the facts
showed that was the case.
"British politics is among the cleanest in the world but we do
have a trust problem," he said. "We've got to move politics from
being another spectator sport, complete with celebrity events
and scandals, to a contact sport where we are on the field
together for the serious business of politics."
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
20 The Age: It's clean and it's green, but Howard isn't interested in it -
Opinion
www.theage.com.au
Suzy Freeman-Greene
September 26, 2006
IN MAY, John Howard called for a "full-blooded debate" on
nuclear power. When the Prime Minister asks for debate, we
oblige, and the issue has attracted headlines since. But while
nuclear, wind power and even carbon geosequestration are the
subject of spirited discussion as we grapple with global
warming, there's a clean, green power source that barely seems
to rate a mention. It's solar power.
Australia is one of the world's sunniest countries and an
innovator in solar research. "We used to be a world leader in
solar power," says the Australian Conservation Foundation's
Erwin Jackson. "Now we're falling abysmally behind countries
like Japan."
For more than a decade, according to the New Internationalist,
the Japanese Government has paid subsidies to householders who
install photovoltaic panels on their roofs. The subsidies are
being phased out but capacity is still expected to grow by 20
per cent a year.
Germany, meanwhile, has installed more than 100 times
Australia's grid-connected solar capacity. "Yet if you put the
same panel on a roof in Australia (where it's sunnier) it would
produce twice as much capacity," says Jackson.
But in Australia, the Federal Government is quietly phasing out
the rebates available to homeowners who install panels. The
rebate has been replaced by the $75 million Solar Cities
project, in which four locations will be used to demonstrate and
trial solar technology. In North Adelaide, the first "solar
city", panels and "smart meters" will be installed in 1700
homes.
The project will run until 2012-13. While worthy, it will be
limited to just a few locations and seems small fry compared
with what's going on elsewhere. In Spain, the Government has
legislated to require solar panels in all new and renovated
shopping centres, offices, hotels or warehouses. Jackson says
about 70 per cent of the panels made at BP Solar's Sydney
manufacturing plant are sold overseas.
It costs about $10,000 to $15,000 to put panels on your roof. We
have the technology. We just need to make it cheaper. Says Haydn
Fletcher from Melbourne firm Going Solar: "We already know how
to become solar cities … What we need is policy change." He says
the past 10 months have been the quietest he's seen.
No single power source can replace our reliance on coal; we need
diversity. Solar is not the panacea. But there's so much more we
could do to foster an affordable, large-scale industry. Far from
a fringe affair, the foundation says solar PV is the
fastest-growing energy technology in the world, with growth
rates of 60 per cent annually over the past five years.
One effective way to encourage investment in solar power is to
reward panel owners for the unused power they can feed into the
electricity grid. Many in the local solar industry are calling
for the introduction of a "feed-in tariff", where a small levy
is added to all power bills. The money is then used to pay
households or businesses for their excess solar power at a
higher rate than that paid to dirtier sources.
Governments in Germany, Italy, China, Indonesia, Spain, South
Korea and Switzerland have kick-started their industry with such
a tariff. A draft proposal prepared by BP Solar and Conergy,
says a feed-in tariff would cost the typical power consumer the
equivalent of one cup of coffee a year (presumably about $3).
Things are happening slowly here. Melbourne firm Solar Systems
has proposed a $420 million solar power station in north-western
Victoria that could power 40,000 homes. Solar Systems and Boeing
have developed the project using PV technology designed for
satellites. They have applied for federal funding from the low
emission technologies fund.
The State Government has legislated to require electricity
retailers to meet 10 per cent of their energy needs through
renewable sources by 2016. But the Victorian Opposition has
pledged to scrap the scheme.
When the Prime Minister spoke in May, he described nuclear
power, which produces radioactive waste, as "cleaner and greener
than other forms of power".
Whose debate do we want to have? The one framed by politicians
in thrall to the mining lobby or a discussion about genuinely
clean forms of power? Clearly the Government wants to boost our
coal and uranium industries, but in 100 years' time will there
even be an economy around to protect?
Suzy Freeman-Greene is a staff writer.
When you see news happening: SMS/MMS: 0406 THE AGE (0406 843
243), or us.
Copyright © 2006. The Age Company Ltd. ![]()
Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
has recently held an unprecedented meeting with an "extremely"
senior figure in the Saudi royal house, the Yedioth Aharonot
daily reported.
The mass-selling paper quoted senior Israeli officials on the
meeting, including one that said that the Saudi figure was Saudi
Arabia's King Abdullah himself, who met the Israeli leader in an
undisclosed location.
During their talks, the leaders discussed Iran" /> Iran's
controversial nuclear programme as well as the Saudi peace
initiative, which was adopted by the Arab league in 2002 with
Israel, the report said.
Under the plan, the Arab world would normalise relations with
Israel in exchange for a withdrawal from all land occupied since
1967 and a negotiated solution to the Palestinian refugee issue.
Olmert has had no publicly announced trips abroad recently.
Last week, Yedioth Aharonot reported that Israel and Saudi
Arabia have been conducting secret negotiations.
"Secret negotiations between Israel and Saudi Arabia," the
newspaper headlined its story reporting that contacts had begun
during the recent 34-day war in Lebanon between Israel and
Shiite militant group Hezbollah.
Asked whether there were secret talks going on with Saudi
Arabia, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was quoted as saying: "I
don't have to answer every question".
Olmert was quoted as saying, however, he was "very impressed
with various acts and statements connected with Saudi Arabia,
both those that were made publicly and others as well.
"I am very impressed with King Abdullah's insight and sense of
responsibility," he added, when asked about whether he regarded
a Saudi peace initiative favourably.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
26 Guardian Unlimited: Report: Olmert Met Secretly With Saudi
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday September 25, 2006 10:16 AM
By RAMIT PLUSHNICK-MASTI
Associated Press Writer
JERUSALEM (AP) - An Israeli newspaper reported Monday that Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert secretly met with a senior Saudi Arabian
official to discuss Iran's nuclear program and peace between
Israel and the Palestinians.
The daily Yediot Ahronot quoted an unspecified number of
anonymous Israeli officials as saying that Olmert met with King
Abdullah ``10 days ago.'' It described other officials as
hinting that the talks were with a senior official close to the
king. None of the officials disclosed the location of the
purported meeting, or what was supposed to have been said,
according to the paper.
A senior Israeli government official told The Associated Press
that Olmert did not meet with Abdullah, but would not confirm or
deny that Olmert met with another high-ranking Saudi. The
official spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks were
confidential.
``The prime minister was impressed by the moderate, positive
stands that the Saudis expressed during the summer when Israel
was fighting Hezbollah,'' the official said.
Saudi Arabia, which has no official diplomatic ties with Israel,
has been trying to revive a regional peace initiative it
presented in 2002. Israel rejected the plan at the time, but
Olmert has indicated he might be more open than his predecessor,
Ariel Sharon.
When asked by Yediot last week if Israel had secret contacts
with Saudi Arabia, Olmert said: ``I do not have to answer every
question.''
Israeli Cabinet Minister Gideon Ezra refused to confirm or deny
Monday's report.
``I know what I read in the newspaper,'' Ezra told Israel Radio.
``I think this is the correct way to respond ... every extra
word about these issues is unnecessary.''
Yediot first reported last week that Israel and Saudi Arabia had
been holding secret talks since fighting erupted in July between
Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon.
Israel and the United States say Iran is trying to produce
nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for
peaceful purposes.
Saudi Arabia 's peace initiative called for a full Israeli
withdrawal from lands it captured in the 1967 Mideast war in
exchange for normalization and relations with all Arab
countries. It was rejected by Sharon outright but Olmert struck
a different tone in the interview with Yediot last week.
``I am very impressed with different processes and statements
that are connected to Saudi Arabia, some that have been stated
publicly and others as well. I am very impressed with King
Abdullah's wisdom and sense of responsibility,'' Olmert was
quoted as saying.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
27 UPI: Analysis: The wages of spin
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence -
9/25/2006 7:48:00 AM -0400
By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE UPI Editor at Large
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 (UPI) -- Pakistani President Pervez
Musharraf's much-ballyhooed book "In The Line Of Fire,"
published Monday, contains the standard "sensational
disclosure," pre-pub publicity de rigueur in such tomes. He
claims soon after the 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon and
Manhattan's Twin Towers, then Deputy Secretary of State Rich
Armitage threatened to "bomb Pakistan back to the stone age"
unless Musharraf signed on immediately to president Bush's
global war on terror. Only problem with Musharraf's narrative is
that Armitage didn't resort to Strangelovian Cold War language
to get his point across. But Musharraf's intelligence chief did,
hoping his boss would reject such a crude ultimatum.
Armitage's interlocutor Sept. 13, 2001, was Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad,
the pro-Taliban chief of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence
(ISI) agency. At the time of 9/11, ISI had 1,500 agents
distributed throughout Afghanistan. The Taliban regime was
entirely dependent on the Pakistani lifeline.
At all times, Ahmad knew exactly where Osama bin Laden was
located. His agents tracked his every move. ISI was also aware
of the planning for 9/11. Gen. Ahmad was even accused of
authorizing British-born Pakistani terrorist Ahmed Omar Saeed
Sheikh to make a $100,000 transfer to Mohammed Atta, the
operational chief of the 9/11 conspiracy, a charge that met
vehement denials.
"Sheikh Omar," as he became known, was tried and sentenced to
death for the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal
correspondent Daniel Pearl in 2002. But his ISI links spared him
the gallows. There was little doubt some elements of ISI knew
the outlines of the aerial plot against the U.S. and the
evidence was turned over to the 9/11 Commission three days after
its report had gone to press. It was never made public.
Gen. Ahmad arranged to be in Washington the week of al-Qaida's
big terrorist attack -- presumably to take the Bush
administration's pulse and gauge probable reactions. After
seeing Armitage, he called his boss Musharraf in Islamabad and
translated the
either-you're-with-us-against-the-terrorists-or-against-us-with-t
he-terrorists threat to mean Bush planned to "bomb Pakistan back
to the stone age" unless Musharraf complied with Washington's
wishes.
Afghanistan was in Bush's gun sights before day's end on 9/11
and the U.S. wanted immediate access to Pakistan's air space.
Also permission to use air bases for fighter-bombers and
transport aircraft, and to support Special Forces. By distorting
Armitage's warning, Ahmad was clearly hoping his chief would
refuse to buckle to U.S. demands, as he did not believe the U.S.
would invade another nuclear power whose population was
anti-American and pro-Taliban.
ISI's Ahmad clearly miscalculated. Not only did Musharraf
acquiesce to U.S. demands, but also dispatched Gen. Ahmad to
Kandahar with orders to get Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban
leader, to cough up bin Laden. Ahmad's delegation was made up of
six religious leaders and six ISI officers. His gambling
instincts failed him yet again. He ignored Musharraf's orders
and advised Mullah Omar to hang tough and refuse to surrender
bin Laden. Ahmad reported back to Musharraf Oct. 6, 2001 that
his mission had failed to persuade the Taliban. The U.S.
invasion began next day, Oct. 7.
Five years later, Taliban guerrillas are on the comeback trail,
using the tribal areas that straddle the mountain range, which
demarcates an imaginary line drawn on a map in 1893 between then
British India and Afghanistan. Under U.S. pressure, Musharraf
agreed to deploy over 80,000 troops in Federally Administered
Tribal Areas where they had been banned since independence in
1947.
After losing some 700 Pakistani troops killed and some 3,000
wounded, Musharraf's generals hadn't made a dent in tribal
support for the Taliban and al-Qaida. With some 12 million
people from the same tribes on both sides of the non-existent
border, Taliban and locals are indistinguishable.
Thoroughly frustrated by U.S. pressure and Afghan president
Hamid Karzai's accusations that Pakistan was giving aid and
comfort to the Taliban enemy, Musharraf decided to cut a deal --
with the tribal leaders that despise him and protect the
Taliban. Musharraf agreed to stand down the army. In return, the
turbaned tribal chiefs agreed to keep Taliban fighters from
staging cross-border raids up and down an unmarked line of
jagged mountains and deep ravines. Pakistan also agreed to
release several hundred prisoners, many with known links to
al-Qaida.
Heated denials notwithstanding, Taliban and al-Qaida now have
privileged sanctuaries in North and South Waziristan where they
no longer have to duck when they see a Pakistani soldier.
Several thousand foreign guerrillas -- mostly Uzbeks, Tajiks and
Arabs who made it out of the Tora Bora battle in Dec. 2001, or
stayed on after the Soviets abandoned Afghanistan in 1989, and
married local girls -- are also home free.
A year ago, when this reporter was in Waziristan, a score of
trainers in suicide and roadside bombing techniques had arrived
from Iraq. Today, suicide attacks in Afghanistan are almost as
commonplace as in Iraq. Earlier this month, a suicide bomber
killed Hakim Taniwal, the governor of Afghanistan's Paktia
province. The very next day, at Taniwal's funeral, another
suicide bomber killed five and wounded 30 mourners.
NATO commanders in Afghanistan say Musharraf's deal with
Waziristan's tribal elders cannot possibly make a difference in
Taliban infiltrations from Pakistan. NATO Supreme Commander
James L. Jones says, "let's be patient and give it 30, 60 or 90
days to see if the border gets better, worse, the same, or
whatever." Winter snow shuts down mountain passes, which is when
Taliban prepares its spring offensive from its Pakistani
sanctuaries.
Presidents Bush, Musharraf and Karzai will dine together
Wednesday evening at the White House. The Pakistani will echo
Gen. Jones. Be patient. Winter is coming. He'll also tell Bush
if he orders U.S. troops into Pak tribal areas to hunt bin
Laden, sans Pak hunting license, extremists will score big.
Gen. Jones appealed to NATO members for an additional 2,500
troops to reinforce the 20,000 NATO and 20,000 U.S. troops now
on the ground in Afghanistan. The Poles volunteered 1,000, but
not before next February, and then not for duty in the southern
provinces where the heaviest fighting is taking place. Even
Serbia, the country NATO fought over Kosovo in 1999, was
solicited. Belgrade volunteered five airport security and
logistics officers. Britain, Canada and Romania ponied up
another 1,000. Allied armies are stretched thin with a wide
variety of peacekeeping and peacemaking missions, most recently
in Lebanon.
Friendly governments fear the new Afghan war is unwinnable short
of a major 10-year commitment. But parliaments and national
assemblies balk. Meanwhile, Afghans know from their centuries
old experience sooner or later foreign conquerors leave -- and
in this case the indigenous Taliban stays, lavishly funded by
its cut of the opium poppy bonanza.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
28 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Pursues Closer Ties With Kazakhstan
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday September 25, 2006 9:31 PM
AP Photo NYSF104
By ANNE GEARAN
AP Diplomatic Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met Monday
with Kazakhstan's foreign minister as the U.S. sought closer
ties to the oil-rich country despite what critics call its
disturbing backslide toward autocracy.
Before the meeting, Rice did not answer when asked whether human
rights or energy would top the agenda for the meeting with her
Kazakh counterpart. The session on the sidelines of the United
Nations General Assembly sets up a White House invitation for
Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev on Friday.
Afterward, the State Department said Rice's session with Kazakh
Foreign Affairs Minister Kassymzhomart Taokaev, held in her
suite at the opulent Waldorf-Astoria hotel, included discussions
about Kazakh cooperation in Afghanistan and Iraq. It also
covered hopes for ``a multidimensional relationship with
Kazakhstan, which includes U.S. encouragement for continuing
reforms,'' the department said.
The State Department's assistant secretary of state for human
rights, Barry Lowenkron, accompanied Rice to the meeting.
Nazarbayev's trip starts Tuesday with a private visit to the
Bush family home in Maine to meet President Bush's father,
former President George H.W. Bush.
``The time has come when we can raise our relations to a
completely new level,'' the Kazakh leader said before leaving
for the United States.
Kazakhstan has grown in importance because of its huge oil
reserves. The vast Central Asian republic, which is the size of
Western Europe, is expected to pump 3.5 million barrels of oil a
day in the coming decade.
With the other four former Soviet Central Asian nations being
more authoritarian, too unstable, too poor, or a combination of
all three, Kazakhstan has emerged as the West's logical ally in
the strategic energy-rich region north of Afghanistan and Iran.
The Bush administration also has praised Kazakhstan as a model
because of its decision in the 1990s to dismantle nuclear
weapons it acquired under Soviet rule.
Nazarbayev has held tight control for 17 years, overseeing
Kazakhstan's notable economic advance after the 1991 Soviet
breakup. The economy has grown around 10 percent annually in the
past eight years.
But democratic reforms have stumbled and Nazarbayev's image has
been tarnished by allegations of graft.
Nazarbayev was re-elected with 91 percent of the vote in
December balloting that international observers called flawed.
The 2004 parliamentary vote produced a legislature without a
single opposition lawmaker.
In July, Nazarbayev signed legislation that sets up new
regulations for media organizations, a law that the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe called ``a step
backward'' for media freedoms. Freedom House, a New York-based
pro-democracy group, said the law ``will greatly threaten
freedom of expression and freedom of the press.''
Two of Nazarbayev's most outspoken critics were killed over the
past year - a worrying signal in a country that had no culture
of political murders. Authorities have said both slayings were
nonpolitical.
The U.S. has criticized the election and Kazakhstan's human
rights record, but kept its comments mild.
^---
Associated Press Writer Bagila Bukharbayeva contributed to this
report from Almaty, Kazakhstan.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
29 [NukeNet] 2 oyster creaky articles; terror target? and NRC
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:50:02 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Asbury Park Press, Sept. 24, 2006
REACTOR'S LICENSE MAY HINGE ON RULING
By Nicholas Clunn, Staff Writer
The decision on whether federal regulators will change course and make
terrorism part of the assessment the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant
must pass to have its license renewed might hinge on the
interpretation of a landmark law created 36 years ago.
Officials with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have long said that
the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, does not require that
the possibility of terrorist attacks be taken into account before the
agency issues licenses or permits.
They reiterated that point in June after state officials asked for a
special hearing on Oyster Creek. The state Department of Environmental
Protection contends the Lacey plant, as a condition of receiving a 20-
year license renewal from the NRC, should undergo a terrorism-impact
review because such due diligence is required under NEPA.
In this argument, the state might have a friend in the Ninth U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals and, quite possibly, the U.S. Supreme Court.
The appellate panel in June said the NRC should have considered the
environmental consequences of a potential terrorist attack before
approving a storage site for radioactive waste at a nuclear power
plant in California. The utility handicapped by the ruling has vowed
to file an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, the deadline for which
is Friday.
Mindful of the implications a Supreme Court ruling could bring, the
five NRC commissioners have indefinitely postponed making a decision
on New Jersey's request for a hearing on Oyster Creek.
The outcome of the California case could have much wider effects
beyond Oyster Creek and the nuclear power industry, which is on the
brink of a renaissance.
NEPA often comes into play whenever a federal agency needs to consider
the environmental consequences of a major construction project. The
approval processes for liquefied natural gas terminals, dams, highways
and railways could change if the Ninth Circuit ruling stands.
"It would certainly impede the licensing process," said Mike Bauser,
deputy general council for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an advocacy
group for the industry in Washington, D.C. Bauser also predicted
delays of important federal projects.
No consensus on risk
The crux of this issue is how government should characterize the
likelihood of a terrorist attack. Although the NRC contends that such
attacks are "remote and speculative," the state DEP has described an
attack on Oyster Creek as "reasonably foreseeable."
"A reasonably foreseeable impact is the usual trigger-point for NEPA
reviews," state lawyers argued in a brief submitted to the commission.
Public opinion on the risk of a terrorist attack also varies.
"I think the chance would be about zero," said John Kline, a 66-year-
old life insurance salesman from the Ortley Beach section of Dover
Township. "I can't see why a terrorist would come to South Jersey,
myself."
But Dover Township resident Seth Dinowitz said terrorists would be
interested in Oyster Creek because of its location.
"It's definitely a target," said Dinowitz, a 36-year-old emergency
room physician. "You have a dense population in Monmouth and Ocean
counties."
Requesting an NRC hearing on the threat of terrorism at Oyster Creek
is one of several tactics the state has taken to challenge the plant's
bid for a renewed license.
A renewal for the 36-year-old plant would allow it to operate for an
additional 20 years beyond the 2009 expiration date of its existing
40-year license.
Proponents of the renewal say Oyster Creek pumps money into the local
economy, provides jobs and safely generates electricity without
producing emissions. Critics say the plant is unsafe and that Ocean
County should not be a testing ground for the nation's oldest reactor.
The state's position
At the core of its argument, the state said it is difficult to
reconcile the NRC's stance on the risk of a terrorist attack and the
great steps the agency took after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to
bolster security at the nation's 103 reactors.
"It is illogical for the Commission to consider the threat of
terrorist attacks extremely serious outside the NEPA context but only
speculative and theoretical within it," state lawyers wrote in a brief
to the commission.
On the other side, the NRC's lawyers pointed to numerous agency
decisions that have said that terrorism should not be looked at during
licensing decisions under NEPA.
Doing so would be redundant, regulators say. The NRC already looks at
the terrorism threat through existing programs. It also wouldn't make
sense to wait until a licensing decision for the agency to consider
terrorism concerns at a particular facility, regulators have said.
Signed into law by President Nixon on the first day of 1970, the
National Environmental Protection Act served as the cornerstone of the
environmental programs built by federal, state and local governments
in the 1970s. It's credited for mandating that government consider the
environmental consequences of any proposed action before a decision is
made.
According to Commissioner Jeffrey S. Merrifield, one of five
presidential appointees who run the NRC, and who visited Oyster Creek
last week, the result of a terrorist attack wasn't one of the
consequences on the minds of those who wrote the law.
"Terrorism was not something that was in consideration of the crafters
of the National Environmental Protection Act when it was first
enacted," he said. "From a statutory construction standpoint,
terrorism wasn't part of what was to be considered."
Nicholas Clunn: (732) 643-4072 or nclunn@app.com
Copyright 2006 Asbury Park Press.
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Asbury Park Press, Sept. 24, 2006
ADVISORY PANEL WILL MAKE OYSTER CREEK ASSESSMENT
By Nicholas Clunn, Staff Writer
As part of the review the Oyster Creek Generating Station must pass to
obtain a renewed operating license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, it needs to undergo a secondary review by an advisory
group within the agency.
That group, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, will begin
its look at Oyster Creek during a public meeting Oct. 3. The meeting
will take place from 1:30 to 5 p.m. at NRC headquarters outside
Washington, D.C.
Composed of technical experts, the committee will make an independent
assessment of judgments already made by NRC staff about Oyster Creek.
In the end, the committee's findings and advice will factor into the
agency's final decision.
A renewed license would allow Oyster Creek to run for an additional 20
years. Without it, the plant will close when its initial license
expires in 2009. Plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. filed the renewal
application with the NRC in July 2005.
On Oct. 3, a subcommittee of the Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards will hear presentations from NRC staff, plant operator
AmerGen, the state Department of Environmental Protection and others
interested in Oyster Creek's renewal application. Subcommittee members
will then propose positions and actions for the whole committee to
deliberate at a later date.
Those interested in providing oral or written statements to the
subcommittee should notify its coordinator, Michael Junge, by
Thursday. Junge can be reached at (301) 415-6855.
The meeting will take place at Two White Flint North, one of the two
office buildings that make up NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md. The
street address for the building is 11545 Rockville Pike. The meeting
will be in Room T-2B3.
Nicholas Clunn: (732) 643-4072 or nclunn@app.com
Copyright 2006 Asbury Park Press.
Return to Table of Contents
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Daily Record, Sept. 22, 2006
Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
30 NRC: NRC Issues Order Barring Individual from Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities
News Release - Region IV - 2006-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-06-021
September 25, 2006 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128
E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has barred a former senior
manager at a commercial irradiation facility in Tustin, Calif.,
from any involvement in NRC-licensed activities for one year.
The individual mishandled security-sensitive information and did
not provide complete and accurate information to NRC
investigators when questioned about the incident.
The Confirmatory Order issued to Gary Abel is part of a
settlement agreement he and the NRC reached following Alternate
Dispute Resolution. The order is effective immediately.
An NRC inspection and investigation determined that Mr. Abel
violated NRC requirements while employed as the general manager
of a Sterigenics International, Inc., irradiation facility in
Tustin. Calif. Abel faxed a document containing
security-sensitive information to Sterigenics security
contractor over an unprotected phone line and submitted
information to an NRC investigator he knew was incomplete or
inaccurate when questioned about the incident.
The NRC relies on the accuracy of information provided by its
licensees and their employees, said Bruce S. Mallett,
Administrator of the NRCs Region IV office in Arlington, Texas.
The action we have taken underscores the seriousness with which
we view Mr. Abels behavior.
Mr. Abel has acknowledged that he sent the fax, but denies
deliberately misleading NRC investigators when questioned about
the incident. In a separate action, the NRC has proposed a
$9,600 civil penalty against Sterigenics for violating NRC
requirements.
The order to Mr. Abel will be made available to interested
members of the public through the agencys electronic reading
room at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Help in
accessing these documents is available from the NRC Public
Document Room at: 1-800-397-4209.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Last revised Monday, September 25, 2006
*****************************************************************
31 HindustanTimes.com: Atomic energy panel to scrutinise nuclear deal
BR Srikanth
Bangalore, September 25, 2006
The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will scrutinise the Indo-US
civilian nuclear legislation slated for approval by the Senate
and the Congress. This is to ensure the countrys interests are
safeguarded and address the concerns raised by top nuclear
scientists and parties.
This will be the first time the AEC takes the initiative to vet
the document cleared by the Senate and the Congress. There's
nothing to worry about. We will not allow anyone to take India
for a ride. It's not as if they can force whatever they want on
us. We (AEC) will go word by word over what the Senate and
Congress say. I have told the Prime Minister (Dr Manmohan Singh)
and he has agreed," Prof C.N.R. Rao, chairman of the Prime
Minister's Science Advisory Council and member of the AEC, said.
The deal, according to Prof Rao, will help India end its status
as a "nuclear apartheid nation" and facilitate import of uranium
from Australia and Brazil for long-term energy security. "Right
now, we do not have uranium (in sufficient quantity to support
the nuclear power programme). Unless this deal with the United
States comes through, none will sell uranium to us, not even
Russia, Australia or Brazil."
Prof Rao's assertion came in the light of apprehension among
nuclear scientists that the "lawmakers of the US Congress" could
modify both in letter and spirit, the implementation of the
Indo-US agreement.
As regards the indigenous nuclear energy programme, Prof Rao
said the Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR) will be "our trump card and
everybody will follow our example (FBRs use plutonium and
depleted uranium from Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRS)
as fuel for nuclear energy) .
*****************************************************************
32 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Country Affirms Interest for Nuclear Technology
September 25, 2006
Onyebuchi Ezigbo
Abuja
The Federal Government has reaffirmed its interest for
acquisition of nuclear technology, saying its aspiration to
develop nuclear technology capability may be realised within the
next 10 years.
Presenting Nigeria's case at the 50th regular session of the
General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), at the weekend, the Special Adviser to the President on
Energy, Prof. Anthony Olusegun Adegbulugbe, quoted President
Olusegun Obasanjo as expressing optimism that Nigeria would be
able to generate electricity from her own nuclear power plants
in about a decade from now.
The special adviser said although the country was fully
committed to the spirit and letter of the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty, it would, however, strive to build
nuclear plants and to derive maximum benefits from its
application for power generation.
"The Federal Government hereby reiterates her commitment to
utilizing nuclear science to solve some of her developmental
problems", he said.
According to him, the recent establishment of the Nigerian Atomic
Energy Commission (NAEC) to coordinate activities leading to the
development nuclear technology capacity is a reaffirmation of the
country's determination to deploy the facility for purely
peaceful applications.
He said the President while inaugurating the Board of the NAEC,
had charged the body to develop and implement a proactive energy
programme, which would lead to the generation of electricity
from nuclear power reactor within the next 10 -12 years.
While assuring the international community of the country's
readiness to abide by safety standards, the presidential adviser
said Nigeria had "set in motion the process to fast-track the
development and deployment of nuclear power plants for
electricity generation in the country"
To give vent to the country's quest for nuclear technology
capability, he said the President last July charged the board of
the NAEC to take on the primary responsibility for the
formulation and implementation of the country's nuclear energy
programme.
Adegbulugbe said the country had embarked on a number of
preparatory activities that was necessary to launch it into the
nuclear age, among which were the strengthening of nuclear
regulatory framework and cooperating with the IAEA in observance
of international treaties on nuclear non-proliferation.
He solicited the continued support of IAEA in fostering regional
cooperation towards effective utilization of some of the nuclear
technology projects, which included the Gama Irradiation Plant,
(a multi-purpose facility for industrial and research
applications located in Abuja) and a miniature neutron source
reactor in Zaria.
The presidential adviser said Nigeria had benefited immensely
from the agency's support to the African Regional Cooperative
Agreement for Research, Training and Development (AFRA) related
to nuclear science and technology in education and training.
He said the country is currently engaged in the mobilization and
information programme aimed at enlightening the public on the
benefits of the peaceful use of nuclear energy in electricity
generation, agriculture, and health care delivery and pest
control.
Copyright © 2006 This Day. All rights reserved. Distributed by
AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). Click here to contact
*****************************************************************
33 NRC: Notice of Opportunity To Comment on Model Application on
FR Doc 06-8152
[Federal Register: September 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 185)]
[Notices] [Page 55807-55809] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25se06-47]
Technical Specification Improvement To Modify Requirements
Regarding LCO 3.10.1, Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing
Operation Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Request for comment.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model licensee
application relating to the modification of shutdown testing
requirements in technical specifications (TS) for Boiling Water
Reactors (BWR).
The purpose of this model is to permit the NRC to efficiently
process amendments that propose to modify LCO 3.10.1 that would
allow control rod scram time testing to be performed concurrently
with inservice leak and hydrostatic testing. Licensees of nuclear
power reactors to which the model applies could then request
amendments, confirming the applicability to their reactors. The
NRC staff is requesting comment on the model application prior to
announcing its availability for license amendment applications. A
model
[[Page 55808]] safety evaluation and no significant hazards
determination regarding the proposed changes to LCO 3.10.1 have
been previously posted in the Federal Register for comment on
August 21, 2006 (71 FR 48561).
DATES: The comment period expires October 25, 2006. Comments
received after this date will be considered if it is practical to
do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only
for comments received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either electronically or via
U.S. mail. Submit written comments to Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives, and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative
Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: T-6 D59, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand
deliver comments to: 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,
between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of
comments received may be examined at the NRC's Public Document
Room, 11555 Rockville Pike (Room O-1F21), Rockville, Maryland.
Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to
NRCREP@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Kobetz, Mail
Stop: O-12H2, Division of Inspections and Regional Support,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, telephone 301-415-1932.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulatory Issue Summary
2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for
Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power
Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The consolidated line
item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to improve the
efficiency of NRC licensing processes by processing proposed
changes to the standard technical specifications (STS) in a
manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications.
The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on a
proposed change to the STS after a preliminary assessment by the
NRC staff and a finding that the change will likely be offered
for adoption by licensees. A model safety evaluation and no
significant hazards determination regarding the proposed changes
to LCO 3.10.1 have been previously posted in the Federal Register
for comment on August 21, 2006 (71 FR 48561). This notice
solicits comment on a proposed model licensee application that
would modify LCO 3.10.1 to allow control rod scram time testing
to be performed concurrently with inservice leak and hydrostatic
testing.
Applicability Licensees opting to apply for this TS change are
responsible for reviewing the staff's evaluation, referencing the
applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary
plant-specific information. Each amendment application made in
response to the notice of availability will be processed and
noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
Public Notices This notice requests comments from interested
members of the public within 30 days of the date of publication
in the Federal Register. After evaluating the comments received
as a result of this notice, the staff will either reconsider the
proposed change or announce the availability of the change in a
subsequent notice (perhaps with some changes to the safety
evaluation or the proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination as a result of public comments). If the staff
announces the availability of the change, licensees wishing to
adopt the change must submit an application in accordance with
applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. For each
application the staff will publish a notice of consideration of
issuance of amendment to facility operating licenses, a proposed
no significant hazards consideration determination, and a notice
of opportunity for a hearing. The staff will also publish a
notice of issuance of an amendment to an operating license to
announce the modification of TS 3.10.1, Inservice Leak and
Hydrostatic Testing, for each plant that receives the requested
change.
Proposed Model Application for License Amendments Adopting
TSTF-484, Rev. 0, ``Use of TT 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing
Activities'' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control
Desk, Washington, DC 20555.
Subject: [Plant Name] Docket No. 50--License Amendment Request
for Adoption of TSTF-484, Rev. 0, ``Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram
Time Testing Activities'' In accordance with the provisions of
Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), [Licensee] is submitting a request for an amendment to the
technical specifications (TS) for [Plant Name, Unit No.]. The
proposed amendment would revise LCO 3.10.1, and the associated
Bases, to expand its scope to include provisions for temperature
excursions greater than [200][deg]F as a consequence of inservice
leak and hydrostatic testing, and as a consequence of scram time
testing initiated in conjunction with an inservice leak or
hydrostatic test, while considering operational conditions to be
in Mode 4. This change is consistent with NRC approved Revision 0
to Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Improved Standard
Technical Specification Change Traveler, TSTF-484, ``Use of TS
3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing Activities''. The availability of
this TS improvement was announced in the Federal Register on
[Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the consolidated line item
improvement process (CLIIP).
Attachment 1 provides an evaluation of the proposed change.
Attachment 2 provides the existing TS pages marked up to show the
proposed change. Attachment 3 provides the proposed TS changes in
final typed format. Attachment 4 provides the existing Bases
pages marked up to show the proposed change.
[Licensee] requests approval of the proposed license amendment by
[Date], with the amendment being implemented [By Date or within X
Days].
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application, with
attachments, is being provided to the designated [State]
Official.
If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please
contact [ ].
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United
States of America that I am authorized by [Licensee] to make this
request and that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on [Date].
[Name, Title] Attachments: 1. Evaluation of Proposed Change 2.
Proposed Technical Specification Change (Mark-Up) 3. Proposed
Technical Specification Change (Re-Typed) 4. Proposed Technical
Specification Bases Change (Mark-Up) cc: [NRR Project Manager]
[Regional Office] [Resident Inspector] [State Contact] Attachment
1--Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request for
Adoption of TSTF-484, Rev. 0, ``Use of TS 3.10.1 for SCRAM Time
Testing Activities'' 1.0 Description
[[Page 55809]] 2.0 Proposed Change 3.0 Background 4.0 Technical
Analysis 5.0 Regulatory Safety Analysis 5.1 No Significant
Hazards Determination 5.2 Applicable Regulatory
Requirements/Criteria 6.0 Environmental Consideration 7.0
References 1.0 Description The proposed amendment would revise
LCO 3.10.1, and the associated Bases, to expand its scope to
include provisions for temperature excursions greater than
[200][deg]F as a consequence of inservice leak and hydrostatic
testing, and as a consequence of scram time testing initiated in
conjunction with an inservice leak or hydrostatic test, while
considering operational conditions to be in Mode 4. This change
is consistent with NRC approved Revision 0 to Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Improved Standard Technical
Specification Change Traveler, TSTF-484, ``Use of TS 3.10.1 for
Scram Time Testing Activities.'' The availability of this TS
improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [Date] ([ ]
FR [ ]) as part of the consolidated line item improvement process
(CLIIP).
2.0 Proposed Change Consistent with the NRC approved Revision 0
of TSTF-484, the proposed TS changes include a revised TS 3.10.1,
``Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation.'' Proposed
revisions to the TS Bases are also included in this application.
Adoption of the TS Bases associated with TSTF-484, Revision 0 is
an integral part of implementing this TS amendment. The changes
to the affected TS Bases pages will be incorporated in accordance
with the TS Bases Control Program.
This application is being made in accordance with the CLIIP.
[Licensee] is not proposing variations or deviations from the TS
changes described in TSTF-484, Revision 0, or the NRC staff's
model safety evaluation (SE) published on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as
part of the CLIIP Notice of Availability.
3.0 Background The background for this application is adequately
addressed by the NRC Notice of Availability published on [Date]
([ ] FR [ ]).
4.0 Technical Analysis [Licensee] has reviewed the safety
evaluation (SE) published on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the
CLIIP Notice of Availability. [Licensee] has concluded that the
technical justifications presented in the SE prepared by the NRC
staff are applicable to [Plant, UNIT No.] and therefore justify
this amendment for the incorporation of the proposed changes to
the [Plant] TS.
5.0 Regulatory Safety Analysis 5.1 No Significant Hazards
Determination [Licensee] has reviewed the no significant hazards
determination published on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the
CLIIP Notice of Availability. [Licensee] has concluded that the
determination presented in the notice is applicable to [Plant,
Unit No.] and the determination is hereby incorporated by
reference to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(a). 5.2
Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria A description of the
proposed TS change and its relationship to applicable regulatory
requirements was provided in the NRC Notice of Availability
published on [Date] ([ [ FR [ ]).
6.0 Environmental Consideration [Licensee] has reviewed the
environmental evaluation included in the safety evaluation (SE)
published on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice of
Availability. [Licensee] has concluded that the staff's findings
presented in that evaluation are applicable to [Plant, No.] and
the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this
application.
7.0 References 1. Federal Register Notice, Notice of Availability
published on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]).
2. Federal Register Notice, Notice for Comment published on
August 21, 2006 (71 FR 48561) 3. TSTF-484 Revision 0, ``Use of TS
3.10.1 for Scram Times Testing Activities'' Attachment
2--Proposed Technical Specification Change (Mark-Up) Attachment
3--Proposed Technical Specification Change (Re-Typed) Attachment
4--Proposed Technical Specification Bases Change (Mark-Up)
Principal Contributor: Aron Lewin.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy Kobetz, Chief, Technical Specifications Branch, Division
of Inspections and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06-8152 Filed 9-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
34 Rediff: US Business Council batting for nuclear deal
Rediff.com The Web
September 25, 2006 17:41 IST
Ron Somers, president, the US-India Business Council in
Washington, DC, is spearheading a campaign to ensure that the
nuclear deal now before the US Senate comes through, reports The
Wall Street Journal newspaper.
Somers, who 'believes the nuclear power pact represents the key
to unlocking India's huge economic potential -- and the billions
of dollars in business opportunities that would follow for US
companies,' is working with several US companies and
Indian-American outfits to ensure that the nuclear deal is
passed without a hitch by the Senate, the Journal report said.
'The pure fundamentals of India point to an extraordinary
opportunity for multinationals,' the report quoted Somers, 51,
as saying. 'This is the dawn of a whole new era.'
'Companies including Westinghouse Electric Co, Boeing Co and
Ford Motor Co have lined up behind the initiative. Another
strong backer, General Electric Co, provided reactors for
India's fledgling nuclear program in 1969 before breaking off
cooperation when India exploded a nuclear device five years
later,' the report said.
Last year, the USIBC hired Washington, DC firm Patton Boggs LLP
to lobby US legislators to support the nuclear treaty.
India's plans to seek foreign assistance for producing 20,000
megawatts of nuclear power by 2020, could 'generate $30 billion
in sales for US companies that provide nuclear know-how and
equipment,' the report quoted Somers as saying.
Also, the Indian Air Force's plans to order 126 fighter jets,
estimated at $6 billion, could 'tilt toward US companies if
nuclear links are established and barriers to sharing technology
can be lowered,' the article quoted Chris Chadwick,
vice-president of global strike systems at Boeing Integrated
Defense Systems, as saying.
In November, when the nuclear deal is expected to be finalised,
the largest-ever American trade delegation -- with 200 companies
-- is expected to visit India.
Somers' optimism about India remains high despite having faced
several business setbacks in India earlier owing to bureaucratic
red-tape and subsidies to farmers, the newspaper said.
Two of his ventures, a Cogentrix Energy plan to set up a
coal-fired power plant in Karnataka and later Unocal's plans to
set up a gas pipeline grid from Bangladesh, were shelved by
bureaucratic hurdles.
Complete Coverage: The India-US nuclear deal
© 2006 Rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: Omaha Public Power District Notice of Withdrawal of Application
FR Doc 06-8153
[Federal Register: September 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 185)]
[Notices] [Page 55807] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25se06-46]
for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of
Omaha Public Power District (the licensee) to withdraw its May
14, 2004, application for proposed amendment to Facility
Operating License No. DPR-40 for the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit
No. 1 (FCS), located in Washington County, Nebraska.
The proposed amendment would have revised the Technical
Specifications Section 2.3(2)b, ``Modification of Minimum
Requirements.'' Specifically, the proposed change would have
provided a risk-informed alternative to the existing restoration
period for the High-Pressure Safety Injection System.
The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on July
6, 2004 (69 FR 40677). However, by letter dated August 25, 2006,
the licensee withdrew the proposed change.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated May 14, 2004, and the licensee's
letter dated August 25, 2006, which withdrew the application for
license amendment. 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 O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records
will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading
Room on the internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.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, or 301-415-4737 or by
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day
of September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan B. Wang, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06-8153 Filed 9-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
36 BBC: Concern over Middle East nuclear plans
Last Updated: Monday, 25 September 2006
By Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News website
[Gama Mubarak]
Gamal Mubarak announced Egypt's nuclear power plan
Plans announced recently by Egypt and Turkey that they hope to
build nuclear power plants are raising a ripple of concern about
the long-term prospect of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
"It is easy to exaggerate and it is true that these countries
have a right to seek all sources of energy but it is indisputable
that there is also a strategic element to this," said Mark
Fitzpatrick, senior fellow in non-proliferation at the
International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.
One of the dangers of Ir going nuclear has always been that it
might provoke others. So when you see the development of nuclear
power elsewhere in the region, it does raise concerns Mark
Fitzpatrick
"Having a nuclear infrastructure is the step which a country
needs to accomplish if it decides to embark on the path of
nuclear weapons. Pakistan took that route," he said.
According to this theory, Egypt and Turkey are worried at the
failure of the United Nations to stop Iran from enriching
uranium. They consider they might be left behind if Iran,
despite its denials, does one day develop as a nuclear armed
power.
They are therefore taking preliminary steps to protect
themselves from a security point of view as well as an energy
one.
"One of the dangers of Iran going nuclear has always been that
it might provoke others. So when you see the development of
nuclear power elsewhere in the region, it does raise concerns,"
said Mark Fitzpatrick.
Case for nuclear power
On the other hand, Western concerns might be seen in the Middle
East as another example of advanced countries, which freely use
nuclear energy and some of which have nuclear weapons, trying to
hold others back.
Turkey has a good energy case for going ahead with the three
plants it plans to build by 2015.
According to the CIA World Factbook, Turkey is estimated to
produce 50,000 barrels of oil per day yet it consumes 700,000
barrels per day.
Egypt is oil-richer. It has reserves of some 2.7 billion
barrels, according to the CIA, produces 700,000 barrels per day
and is estimated to consume about 500,000 per day. It has
announced plans to build one nuclear power station.
The proposal was announced by Gamal Mubarak, President Hosni
Mubarak's son, and his central role in this is being taken as a
sign that Gamal intends to run for the presidency after his
father.
Both Turkey and Egypt have also signed up to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This bans the further spread of
nuclear weapons among member states.
Both could also argue that in a world worried about the use of
fossil fuels, nuclear energy is an environmentally friendly
option.
However, energy is not the only factor a country takes into
account when developing nuclear energy.
There are the issues of prestige and the opportunity for
domestic scientific development. Both have been played up by
Iran which has managed to turn its nuclear ambition into a
symbol of national ambition and progress.
Not seeking to enrich uranium
One factor calming down the strategic fears is that neither
Egypt nor Turkey is talking, as Iran is, about developing an
indigenous uranium enrichment capability.
No-one should simply assu that Israel would stay where it is now
with its ambiguous capability if Iran becomes a nuclear power.
Israeli policy is likely to change, in order to demonstrate that
the country has continued strategic superiority Professor Gerald
Steinberg, Bar-Ilan University
Enriched uranium is used for the generation of nuclear power.
But the same process can enrich uranium more highly and that can
be used in a nuclear bomb.
Enriched uranium is widely available on the world market. Iran's
insistence that it needs to carry out the enrichment itself is
one of the factors behind Security Council demands that Iran
suspend enrichment while talks take place on its whole
programme.
Israel's possession of nuclear weapons has often prompted
similar fears of a nuclear arms race. Egypt has called for a
nuclear weapons-free Middle East.
However, the prospects for that appear to be further away than
ever. Israel regards Iran as its principal strategic threat.
It has a policy of neither confirming nor denying its nuclear
weapons capacity, saying only that it will not be the first to
"introduce nuclear weapons" into the region. That ambiguous
approach is going to be strained if it concludes that Iran is
going for the bomb.
"No one should simply assume that Israel would stay where it is
now with its ambiguous capability if Iran becomes a nuclear
power," Professor Gerald Steinberg, head of the Conflict
Management Programme at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv told
Reuters recently.
"Israeli policy is likely to change, in order to demonstrate
that the country has continued strategic superiority," he said.
Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
*****************************************************************
37 RosBusinessConsulting: Rosenergoatom to become joint-stock company
rbc.ru
RBC, 25.09.2006, St. Petersburg 13:44:48.In the first half
of 2007, Rosenergoatom will be transformed from a federal
unitary enterprise into a joint-stock company in which the
government will have a 100 percent stake, Oleg Sarayev, Deputy
General Director of Rosenergoatom, said at the international
nuclear forum in St. Petersburg today. He said the company's
present form did not allow it to achieve goals set by Russian
President Vladimir Putin.
The Russian State Concern for Electricity and Heat
Production by Nuclear Power Plants (Rosenergoatom) was set up in
accordance with the Russian President's decree dated 7 September
1992. On 8 September 2001, it was transformed into a power
generating company to incorporate all operating nuclear power
plants, both existing and under construction, as well as
companies providing operational, maintenance, scientific and
technical support for nuclear power plants.
Rosenergoatom currently has 10 nuclear power plants with a
combined capacity of 23,242 MW.
All rights reserved. © 1995 - 2006 RosBusinessConsulting.
© 2006 Associated Press.
*****************************************************************
38 GAZETA.KZ: All nuclear programmes should be transparent and controlled by IAEA -
Kazakh FM
25.09.2006
Kazakhstan today
ASTANA. All peaceful nuclear programmes should be transparent and
controlled by the IAEA. Kassymzhomart Tokayev, Foreign Minister
of Kazakhstan, made such statement speaking September 22 in New
York at common debates of the 61st session of the UN General
Assembly, Kazakhstan Today reports citing the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Kazakhstan.
Speaking about such relevant today subject as the nuclear arms,
Mr. Tokayev observed that Kazakhstan constantly supported the
non-proliferation regime. The Kazakhstani people painfully came
to such position, because it still experiences negative
consequences of the Semipalatinsk nuclear testing ground that was
closed 15 years ago by order of President Nazarbayev, supported
by the historical decision to give up the fourth nuclear
potential.
The Kazakhstani Foreign Minister also noted the importance of an
Agreement on the Nuclear Arms Free Zone in Central Asia recently
signed in Semipalatinsk. According to Mr. Tokayev, the political
will manifested by five Central Asian states can catalyse the
Non-Proliferation activities and a real progress can be achieved
in this area if all countries fulfill their commitments. The
Central Asian states show readiness to continue consultations on
the implementation of this Agreement with the Security Council
member states.
All rights reserved. Whenever materials from this website are
used link/hyperlink is obligatory.
Copyright © Internet Department of PH "Alma-Media", 2000-2006
*****************************************************************
39 Slovenia Business Week: Experts Debate Future of Nuclear Energy at Portoroz Conference
The "Nuclear Power for A New Europe 2006" conference is to
provide views by experts on the feasability of nuclear energy.
According to Igor Jencic from the Jozef Stefan Institute,
Slovenia's top research institution, nuclear energy is the
energy of the future.
It is the only thing that can assure enough energy for today's
world without causing greenhouse effects, Jencic is convinced.
Special attention will also be given at the event to the fact
that in recent years there has been a rise in the use of
alternative sources of energy.
Although some of the alternative sources have put a doubt over
the future of nuclear energy, Jencic believes that there is no
way that these sources can provided the necessary electricity
for the world's growing energy needs.
Nuclear energy is seeing a revival in economic and political
circles as well as in the public, Jencic pointed out.
Source: Slovene Press Agency STA
*****************************************************************
40 PDM: IAEA commissioner falls into water tank at Czech nuclear plant -
Prague Daily Monitor
"http://www.praguemonitor.com/css/pdm.css";
Jihlava, South Moravia, Sept 23 (CTK) - A US commissioner from
the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
emerged unharmed after falling into a water tank at the Dukovany
nuclear power plant on Friday.
The daily Mlada fronta Dnes reported Friday that commissioners
training at the facility were moving around the plant in a
group. One of them, however, left the group and fell into the
tank. The water in the tank was not radioactive.
A spokesman for the plant told MfD that the commissioner
admitted he had made a mistake. "The rules say that no one is
allowed to leave the group," the spokesman said.
The water tank is used in the process of loading and unloading
nuclear fuel. Although the water was not in contact with any
nuclear fuel during the training, the commissioner was examined
to make sure he was not contaminated with radioactivity.
ms/dr
This story copyright 2006 CTK Czech News Agency.
The Prague Daily Monitor
*****************************************************************
41 THISDAY ONLINE: Nigeria Affirms Interest for Nuclear Technology
From Onyebuchi Ezigbo in Abuja, 09.25.2006
The Federal Government has reaffirmed its interest for
acquisition of nuclear technology, saying its aspiration to
develop nuclear technology capability may be realised within the
next 10 years.
Presenting Nigeria's case at the 50th regular session of the
General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), at the weekend, the Special Adviser to the President on
Energy, Prof. Anthony Olusegun Adegbulugbe, quoted President
Olusegun Obasanjo as expressing optimism that Nigeria would be
able to generate electricity from her own nuclear power plants
in about a decade from now.
The special adviser said although the country was fully
committed to the spirit and letter of the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty, it would, however, strive to build
nuclear plants and to derive maximum benefits from its
application for power generation.
"The Federal Government hereby reiterates her commitment to
utilizing nuclear science to solve some of her developmental
problems", he said.
According to him, the recent establishment of the Nigerian
Atomic Energy Commission (NAEC) to coordinate activities leading
to the development nuclear technology capacity is a
reaffirmation of the country's determination to deploy the
facility for purely peaceful applications.
He said the President while inaugurating the Board of the NAEC,
had charged the body to develop and implement a proactive energy
programme, which would lead to the generation of electricity
from nuclear power reactor within the next 10 -12 years.
While assuring the international community of the country's
readiness to abide by safety standards, the presidential adviser
said Nigeria had "set in motion the process to fast-track the
development and deployment of nuclear power plants for
electricity generation in the country"
To give vent to the country’s quest for nuclear technology
capability, he said the President last July charged the board of
the NAEC to take on the primary responsibility for the
formulation and implementation of the country's nuclear energy
programme.
Adegbulugbe said the country had embarked on a number of
preparatory activities that was necessary to launch it into the
nuclear age, among which were the strengthening of nuclear
regulatory framework and cooperating with the IAEA in observance
of international treaties on nuclear non-proliferation.
He solicited the continued support of IAEA in fostering regional
cooperation towards effective utilization of some of the nuclear
technology projects, which included the Gama Irradiation Plant,
(a multi-purpose facility for industrial and research
applications located in Abuja) and a miniature neutron source
reactor in Zaria.
The presidential adviser said Nigeria had benefited immensely
from the agency's support to the African Regional Cooperative
Agreement for Research, Training and Development (AFRA) related
to nuclear science and technology in education and training.
He said the country is currently engaged in the mobilization and
information programme aimed at enlightening the public on the
benefits of the peaceful use of nuclear energy in electricity
generation, agriculture, and health care delivery and pest
control.
© Copyright 2000-2006 Leaders & Company Limited
*****************************************************************
42 Bellona: Russian state nuke power plant builder to go private next year
This is the ad text B7 partners cooperate with Bellona -->
Russian state nuke power plant builder to go private next year
+ The Russian state-owned nuclear power plant building giant
Rosenergoatom will be reincorporated as a joint stock company
during the first half of 2007, the company’s deputy director
Oleg Saraev told the RIA Novosti newswire on Monday. 25/09-2006
Saraevs announcement comes three days after Rosenergoatom held
negotiations with US Energy giant General Electric on
collaboration in the field of nuclear energy, Rosatom, Russias
nuclear energy agency, reported on its website. General Electric
has already built a Moscow-based office to get its foot in the
door of Russias nuclear industry.
Rosenergoatom runs all 10 of Russias nuclear power plants, for a
total of 31 reactors.
By all indications, the (Rosenergoatom) concern will be
reincorporated as a joint stock company during the first half of
2007, Saraev said according to RIA Novosti.
The corporatization will go forward with 100 percent state
responsibility.
It is not clear if the essential privatization of Rosenergoatom
will have any effect on its relationship with General Electric.
Meanwhile, deputy Rosatom director Andrei Malyshev who in 2006
returned to the nuclear agency from running Russias chief
nuclear oversight service said that Rosatom had worked up a
bill that was sent for review in the Duma, on managing property
in the nuclear field, RIA Novosti reported.
According to Malyshev, the potential law would regulate
commercial activities withing the non-military, energy producing
and power plant building nuclear sphere.
This allows us to assure the competitive edge of the Russian
nuclear field on the world market, he said.
Print Notify a friend Copyright © Bellona -- Reprint and
copying is recommended if source is stated  Support Bellona's
work for the environment - Phone +47 23 23 46 00 | E-MAIL:
info@bellona.no
*****************************************************************
43 PRN: Nearly 7 of 10 Americans Favor Nuclear Energy, Support Building
New Reactors at Existing Sites
PR Newswire
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Nearly seven of 10
Americans favor nuclear energy and 68 percent support building a
new reactor at the existing nuclear power plant closest to where
they live, according to a recent public opinion poll conducted
for the Nuclear Energy Institute.
Regionally, 70 percent of respondents in the Northeast and
Midwest favor the use of nuclear energy, 67 percent in the South
and 66 percent in the West. Favorability among Northeast
residents has increased 12 percentage points since March of this
year.
The nationwide survey showed that 81 percent of those polled
believe that nuclear energy will play an important role in
meeting U.S. future electricity needs, and 76 percent agree that
U.S. utilities should prepare now so new nuclear plants could be
built if needed in the next decade. Sixty-three percent say
electric companies should "definitely" build new nuclear power
plants in the future.
The survey was conducted Sept. 7-10 by Bisconti Research
Inc., with GfK NOP, through telephone interviews with nationally
representative samples of 1,000 U.S. adults age 18 or older. The
margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points.
Bisconti Research has been surveying public attitudes about
nuclear energy for 23 years.
The survey also queried respondents on various attributes
related to electricity production and found that Americans place
the highest value on clean air, affordability and reliability. By
a significant margin, the results showed that most Americans
associate nuclear energy to some degree with these
considerations. For example, 77 percent of those polled associate
nuclear energy "a lot" or "a little" with clean air. Eighty-one
percent associate nuclear energy with reliability; 71 percent
with affordable electricity costs.
"The survey results confirm trends that we have been seeing
for several years that there is a recognition by the American
people of the value of nuclear energy and the need for it to play
a significant role in America's energy production mix," said Ann
Bisconti, president of Bisconti Research.
Nuclear energy produces electricity for one of every five
U.S. homes and businesses without emitting any greenhouse gases
linked to the threat of global climate change. To meet an
expected 45 percent increase in electricity demand by 2030, many
electric companies are taking steps today to build new nuclear
power plants. Twelve energy companies or consortia have announced
plans to file 19 combined construction and operating license
(COL) applications with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to
build up to 30 new reactors. These companies will begin
submitting COL applications in 2007.
Nuclear energy provides nearly three-fourths of the nation's
supply of electricity that doesn't emit greenhouse gases or
controlled air pollutants, such as sulfur and particulates. The
survey found that a plurality of the public (47 percent)
recognizes that nuclear power plants are a way to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions; but 22 percent incorrectly believe
nuclear power plants emit greenhouse gases while nearly one-third
aren't sure.
The Nuclear Energy Institute is the nuclear energy industry's
policy organization. The results of the survey will be posted in
the "News Room" section of the NEI web site at
http://www.nei.org. SOURCE Nuclear Energy Institute Web Site:
http://www.nei.org/
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
Reserved. A United Business Mediacompany.
*****************************************************************
44 UPI: Analysis: Nuke power may spread in Mideast
United Press International - Energy -
9/25/2006 9:05:00 AM -0400
By DEREK SANDS UPI Energy Correspondent
CAIRO, Sept. 25 (UPI) -- At a time of slowing oil production in
some Middle Eastern countries, and the growing influence of a
nuclear Iran, those states may turn to nuclear power to
supplement oil and gas supplies, while balancing Iran's power,
analysts told United Press International.
Amid declining oil exports, Egypt and Yemen have both recently
expressed interest in turning to nuclear power to supplement
their own domestic supplies of oil and gas.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak last Thursday told the final
session of his National Democratic Party's annual congress that
Egypt should look at the possibility of nuclear power. The
statement came just two days after his son, Gamal Mubarak, a
senior party official, addressed the conference and said it was
time for Egypt to pursue alternative energy, including nuclear
power.
Although he denies presidential ambitions, Gamal Mubarak is
widely considered to be a strong candidate for the presidency
when his father's term ends in five years. Egypt could begin a
nuclear program as early as seven or eight years, he said.
The announcement came while the United States and its European
allies consider actions against Iran for its efforts to master
the nuclear fuel cycle, a crucial step in building nuclear
weapons, and necessary to achieving independent nuclear power.
Other countries in the region have also expressed interest in
nuclear energy.
In June, Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, facing a
re-election campaign, suggested that nuclear energy was a
potential option to solve the country's energy shortfalls. Oil
revenues now make up between 65 and 70 percent of the
government's income, but oil production is falling, according to
the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the Department of
Energy's data arm.
"In the cases of Yemen and Egypt, their energy resources are
limited and their domestic energy demand is outgrowing their
domestic energy supply," said Khalid al-Rodhan, the author of
many publications on security and energy in the Middle East, and
a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies
in Washington. "This is even more problematic, given the current
environment of high energy prices. It is unclear whether nuclear
energy is the answer."
Although Egypt's natural gas production is increasing
dramatically, and it has 3.7 billion barrels of proven oil
reserves, its oil exports have declined over the past decade,
according the EIA. The limits of these supplies may push Egypt,
and some other countries, to shift their sources of domestic
energy, al-Rodhan said.
"Given the tightness of the global oil and natural gas market,
many energy producing nations may opt to use oil and gas as
'strategic' exports and use other forms of energy to satisfy
domestic needs," al-Rodhan said.
Although it is still unclear what kind of reception the broad
adoption of nuclear energy in the Middle East would get from the
international community, the United States has already said it
would assist Egypt.
Soon after Gamal Mubarak's call for Egypt to pursue nuclear
power, U.S. Ambassador Francis Ricciardone on Wednesday said on
Egyptian television that the United States would support Egypt
in its efforts, providing the country with technical assistance.
Egypt began efforts at nuclear power as early as the 1950s,
first with help from the United States, then from the Soviet
Union, and has continued its research, though never building
anything more than research facilities. Egypt is a signatory to
the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which allows the country to
develop peaceful nuclear power, but limits its building of
nuclear weapons.
"While the NPT does grant (Egypt and Yemen) the right to acquire
full civilian nuclear cycle, it remain unclear whether each
country wants to face the international scrutiny -- specially
given what Iran has been going through," al-Rodhan said.
But Egypt's and Yemen's apparent desire to pursue nuclear power
may also reflect the changing regional politics, as Iran moves
closer to nuclear independence, according to Mitchell Reiss, the
vice provost for international affairs at the College of William
and Mary in Williamsburg, Va.
"These countries are responding to the rise of Iran, not just
because of its nuclear weapons program, but also because of high
oil prices, and a general sense of growing confidence and
assertiveness on the part of the Iranian leadership," he said.
"They may see a domestic nuclear power program as a hedge
against the rise of Iranian power, although the development of a
purely civilian power program is not a rational response if they
want to counter Tehran."
Whether or not other Middle Eastern countries develop nuclear
power, the problems faced by the United States and Europe in
dealing with Iran's nuclear program demonstrate that efforts to
stop determined countries from pursuing nuclear energy will meet
very limited success, al-Rodhan said.
"The proliferation of nuclear energy/weapons is inevitable,"
al-Rodhan said.
(Comments to energy@upi.com)
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
45 Guardian Unlimited: Man Pleads in Russia Nuclear Cash Case
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday September 25, 2006 11:46 PM
By DAN NEPHIN
Associated Press Writer
PITTSBURGH (AP) - A former nuclear engineer accused of helping a
former Russian official steal more than $9 million earmarked for
improving the safety of that country's Chernobyl-style reactors
pleaded guilty Monday to conspiracy and tax evasion.
Mark M. Kaushansky, of Monroeville, pleaded guilty to conspiracy
to defraud the U.S. government and eight tax evasion counts.
Like former Russian nuclear energy minister Yevgeny Adamov, he
also has been charged with additional conspiracy counts and
money laundering, but Kaushansky's attorney, Fred Theiman, said
he expected those charges to be dropped at sentencing.
Asked by the judge why he was pleading guilty, Kaushansky said,
``I just decided to admit that some tax-related irregularities
were made.''
Kaushansky had a business partnership with Adamov, whom Russian
President Vladimir Putin fired in 2001. Prosecutors allege the
defendants stole $9 million from the U.S., other countries and
corporations by setting up corporations in the U.S. to funnel
money to themselves that was intended to improve Russia's
nuclear safety.
U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said in a statement that the
indictment alleges Adamov was primarily responsible for
diverting the money, but that Kaushansky ``was most directly
involved with the concealment and expenditure of those funds.''
U.S. prosecutors wanted to try Adamov here, but Russian
officials said he should face trial in his home country. He has
denied the charges against him and awaits trial in Russia.
Kaushansky, who emigrated from the Soviet Union in 1979, was
working as a researcher at Westinghouse Electric Corp. and as a
translator when he met Adamov, according to the indictment.
Kaushansky's sentencing hearing was scheduled for Feb. 5, but is
expected to take several days because both sides will present
evidence about the amount of income for which he tried to evade
taxes. Prosecutors say the counts involve income of more than $5
million, but Thieman said it is a fraction of that figure.
In 1986, a shattered reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power
plant spewed radiation across much of Europe, contaminated
77,220 square miles and forced the Soviet government to
permanently evacuate more than 300,000 people. Dozens died
within months, and the U.N. health agency estimated last year
that the ultimate death toll from Chernobyl-related cancers will
be more than 9,000.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
46 ITAR-TASS: Russian Upper House ratifies Convention Against Nuc Terrorism
25.09.2006, 11.33
MOSCOW, September 25 (Itar-Tass) - The Upper House of the
Russian Parliament ratified on Monday, at the first meeting of
its autumn session, the International Convention for the
Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, which the U.N. General
Assembly adopted in April 2005 and which President Vladimir
Putin signed for Russia in September 2005.
Russian First Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Denisov stated in
this connection that “Russia was not only the first country to
sign this convention, but is also among the ten nations that
have already ratified it”. He also explained that the convention
could come into force only after its ratification by the
parliaments of twenty-three countries.
The convention is “the first universal treaty, adopted by the
United Nations on Russia’s initiative, and intended to prevent
terrorist attacks with the use of mass destruction weapons,”
Chairman of the Upper House Committee for International Affairs
Mikhail Margelov stressed in turn.
In accordance with this document, the states parties to the
agreement recognise as criminal offences the illegal and
intentional manufacture, possession and use of radioactive
materials or nuclear devices to cause death or grave injuries,
as well as substantial damage to property or the environment, to
force a physical or juridical person, an international
organisation or state to commit this or that action or to
renounce it.
The states parties to the convention undertake to render each
other assistance by exchanging information and taking every
possible measure to disclose, prevent, and investigate such
crimes and to punish the guilty, including measures to prohibit
the actions of persons and organisations, encouraging and
helping to commit crimes.
© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,
*****************************************************************
47 Global impact of depleted uranium - diabetes pandemic and
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:51:29 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
Global impact of depleted uranium - diabetes pandemic and
financial disaster for all governments
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
DIABETES AND DEPLETED URANIUM:
IF ITS AN EPIDEMIC, ITS NOT GENETIC
By Leuren Moret
September 2, 2006
The global pandemic of diabetes which is increasing
each year, began with the atomic bombs dropped on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The resulting global
atmospheric pollution has resulted in a diabetes
pandemic caused by hundreds of thousands of pounds of
vaporized depleted uranium used in atomic and hydrogen
bombs as "tamping", fission products from nuclear
power plants, and the illegal use of depleted uranium
radioactive poison gas weapons introduced to the
battlefield by the US in 1991. Iraq, Yugoslavia,
Afghanistan, and now Lebanon are now uninhabitable.
Israel soon will be.
Depleted uranium is being used to carry out an illegal
nuclear war against countries with mineral resources
the British Economic Empire and US Economic Empire
must control. The huge global increase in diabetes
between 1996-97 is indicative of a global
environmental event. Now we know why Rhodes Scholar
President Clinton was grid bombing and carpet bombing
in Iraq in the NO-FLY-ZONES for ten years. Grid
bombing and carpet bombing is carried out for the sole
purpose of terrain contamination.
Unfortunately, we the citizens of the world are now
sitting together in the Auschwitz radioactive poison
gas chamber which our atmosphere has been converted
into by the "GLOBAL 2000" National Security Council
policy paper written in 1979 for (David Rockefeller's
protege) President Jimmy Carter by (David
Rockefeller's protege) Henry Kissinger, (David
Rockefeller's protege) Zbiegnew Brzezinski, General
Alexander Haig, and Ed Muskie.
The Queen's favorite American buccaneers, Cheney,
Halliburton, and the Bush family, are tied to her
through uranium mining and the shared use of illegal
depleted uranium munitions in the Middle East, Central
Asia and Kosovo/Bosnia.
Thank you Queen Elizabeth, the Rothschilds, and David
Rockefeller for carrying out the depopulation plans of
Sir Cecil Rhodes, the sponsor of the Rhodes
Scholarship and mid-1800s explorer of Africa.
GLOBAL DEPOPULATION HAS BEGUN:
http://www.berkeleycitizen.org/diabetes.html
THE QUEEN'S DEATH STAR:
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2006/DU-Europe-Moret26feb06.htm
<LeurenMoret@yahoo.com>
-----------------------------------
(Posted for educational and research purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).
*****************************************************************
48 [NukeNet] State wildlife biologists are trying to find out
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:48:42 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispotribune/15590318.htm
Posted on Sat, Sep. 23, 2006
Die-off of cormorants investigated
About 100 are found dead, but deaths do not appear to be related to the
plant, expert says
By David Sneed
dsneed@thetribunenews.com
State wildlife biologists are trying to find out what caused a die-off of
cormorants at Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant.
On Aug. 15, commercial divers found about 100 dead Brandt's cormorants on
bars that cover the plant's cooling water intake structure. The discovery
of that many dead birds is unusual, plant officials said in a report to
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Divers collected four of the dead birds and turned them over to the state
Department of Fish and Game for analysis to determine the cause of death.
"It seems like a pretty isolated event," said Mike Harris, a state
biologist in Morro Bay. "There is no indication that it had anything to do
with the operation of the plant."
Brandt's cormorants are sleek black shorebirds common along the Central
Coast. They are most often seen roosting in large colonies on offshore
rocks.
Plant workers noticed five live cormorants struggling in the water in
front of the intake structure the day before the die-off was discovered,
plant spokesman Jeff Lewis said. The next day, commercial divers found the
dead birds during a regularly scheduled inspection of the intake
structure.
State biologists have conducted some tests on the birds and are beginning
to narrow down the cause of death. Final results of the testing will be
available in late October.
"We've pretty well ruled out domoic acid or some other algal bloom, but
there's still concern that it's possibly some other type of toxic event,"
Harris said.
Plant workers report that an unusually large colony of cormorants nested
on a rock near the south end of the intake structure this year. They
estimate that between 2,000 and 3,000 birds nested there, Lewis said.
The cormorants were of a range of ages and were not emaciated, so Harris
does not think they died of starvation, which killed a large number of
juvenile brown pelicans earlier this year.
Divers regularly inspect the intake structure to check its condition and
remove debris. The structure had been inspected about a week before the
die-off was discovered, leading biologist to believe that the event
happened quickly.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Tori Woodard is a dear friend of mine who now lives in China. She just got
back from a 30-day trip through Mongolia. The following quote is from an
email to me after visiting a temple -
"After we look at some particularly frightening gods, Muugii asks me
what my religion is. I shrug and say I don't have one. Her response
surprises me: "Then you're free!"
Mongolians understand freedom."
Molly Johnson
6290 Hawk Ridge Place
San Miguel, CA 93451
Cell: 805 296-0524
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
49 reviewjournal.com: Test site workers' records dumped
Sep. 25, 2006
25 years of data listed tunnel comings, goings
Former Nevada Test Site workers Oscar Foger and Sandie Medina
walk Thursday down a hallway in a Las Vegas hotel after they
discussed working conditions and missing tunnel records outside a
presidential advisory board meeting on radiation and worker
health. Photo by Clint Karlsen.
For 25 years, Sandie Medina filed records for Nevada Test Site
workers, keeping in cardboard boxes the toxic-materials reports,
personnel rosters, weekly safety meetings, accident log books and
lists of miners and craftsmen who re-entered a tunnel where
nuclear bomb tests were conducted.
In all, 100 green-and-white Xerox boxes that held the records
from 1970 to 1995 were stored in an alcove building at the
entrance to N Tunnel in Area 12 at the test site.
It was diligent work Medina was proud of because she thought the
information would be useful to any of the workers who might later
seek compensation for illnesses they believe stem from their jobs
at the test site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
When she last checked in the fall of 1997, Medina said the boxes
of records were still in the alcove building.
"But when we went back in February 1998, they were gone," she
said Thursday in the hallway of a Las Vegas hotel near where a
presidential advisory board had gathered to discuss problems
that former test site workers have in proving their compensation
claims.
What she found out from a forklift operator who carted off the
boxes was that they were taken to a landfill at the test site
and buried.
"It really hurts," she said. "It destroyed a lot of information
that could be helpful to what we're doing now."
After her job as chief clerk for a test site contractor, she
became union project manager for the Southern Nevada Building
and Construction Trade Council's test site medical surveillance
project. As such, she said, she has seen the result of exposures
to radiation and chemicals that many miners and craftsmen
endured.
"Now with the job I'm doing, I see my friends sick, funeral
after funeral," she said.
In interviews since July, officials with the Department of
Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration have denied
that any records that would be useful to resolving worker claims
under the Labor Department's Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program were destroyed.
They said many records were kept in duplicate and triplicate
forms and are being scanned in a computer database under a
cataloguing project with the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Ken Hoar, acting assistant manager for safety programs at the
test site, said Friday any industrial hygiene record would have
been sent to the Safety Department at Mercury and stored in a
warehouse for archiving.
Some records might have to be kept for three years or 75 years,
for example, based on the government's records retention
requirements.
"Is it a record or operational information? If it's a record we
should have it," he said.
Documents and reports about site operations that didn't contain
information about industrial hygiene or exposure to radiation,
or information that didn't deal with health and safety, might
have been disposed of, Hoar said.
"That kind of stuff probably ended up in the landfill," he said.
However, Hoar said, if it was a record pertaining to the health
and safety of workers, then "the government has been very
studious about making sure the records have been managed in a
professional manner."
Test site spokesman Darwin Morgan said hundreds of thousands of
pages of historical records from 1955 through 1992, including
health data reports, radiation personnel listings as well as
industrial hygiene logbooks and reports from 1986 to 1990, have
been supplied to Dr. Lew Pepper.
Pepper, of Boston University, was selected in 1996 by the
Department of Energy to conduct medical screening and
surveillance of former test site workers.
Pepper's proposal for independent research was reviewed and
recommended by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health.
Morgan said Thursday that his agency has maintained "a very
defensible and trackable system" of records.
"Our position is there is enough other records ... to establish
claims," Morgan said.
Nevertheless in a July interview, Pepper recalled the time in
late 1997 when he was making arrangements to check the N Tunnel
records that had been kept by Medina.
"I was coming out to review the records, and I was told they
were no longer available. We were told they were put in the
landfill, accidentally placed in a landfill," he said.
Pepper said he doesn't know for sure what records were hauled to
the dump, but the test site's prime contractor at the time did
provide him later with 10 years' worth of electronically stored
industrial hygiene data.
In telephone conversations last week, Pepper said for the most
part he has been pleased with DOE's effort to provide him
records.
However, he said, "The absence of data doesn't help us. I think
any information can be useful in general to improve the
understanding for a group of workers from a particular part of
the test site. Better data always helps."
At last week's meeting of the Presidential Advisory Board on
Radiation and Worker Health, the chairman of the Nevada Test
Site working group, Robert Presley, noted in his report to the
board that missing data and employee misuse of radiation
detection badges are among the issues that fog the compensation
process.
During a break in the meeting Wednesday, he said some exposure
and industrial hygiene records are probably missing from
throughout the nation's nuclear weapons complex.
"There have been campaigns over the last 40 years that we don't
need these records so let's get rid of them. We didn't think
we'd need them 30 years later," Presley said. "Yeah, there could
have been records that were taken out and dumped."
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., also referred to the plight of former
test site workers, many of whom "have already died while waiting
for the compensation, stuck in a bureaucratic nightmare of
obstruction and delay."
They have been denied compensation "as a result of flawed
calculations based on records that are incomplete or in error as
well as the use of faulty assumptions and incorrect models,"
Reid told the board in a videoconference from Washington, D.C.
Medina, former test site miner Oscar Foger and John Funk, a
carpenter who installed bulkheads in tunnels, said among faulty
assumptions is that the dosimetry records based on film badge
readings are accurate.
They noted, too, that working conditions inside the tunnels
didn't always meet health and safety standards.
Medina said in some cases dosimetry badges were not worn inside
the tunnels or were covered to prevent detection of exposure to
radioactive materials.
In other cases, workers who approached the safe limit for
exposure over a certain period were told not to come to work or
risk losing their access to the tunnels.
"Those are nothing but a joke, because those guys worked in
these hot areas and they show zero, zero, zero," Medina said
about the dosimetry records. "Then why would they send a guy
home for four days?"
Funk wonders why workers would register triple zeros for
exposure to radiation when they knew they were entering
so-called "hot" areas for radioactivity.
"Guys were laid off because they exceeded their allowable rate,
and they still had triple zeroes on their report card," Funk
said.
Foger, the miner, said he and co-workers used rags instead of
respirators or masks to keep from inhaling dust laced with toxic
substances or radioactive particles while they worked inside
tunnels.
"You got a bandanna thing to put across your face to keep dust
out of your mouth," Foger said.
He said managers also provided the miners with an ample supply
of beer and pizza. The beer was for flushing contaminants from
the body.
"They would pacify you to keep your mind off of it. They would
bring beer and told us it would keep your kidneys flushed. ...
They really didn't care," he said.
Asked Friday whether the landfill could be exhumed in an effort
to locate the records described by Medina, a test site spokesman
wouldn't comment.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
50 UPI: Anti-radiation treatment studies funded
United Press International - NewsTrack -
9/25/2006 4:21:00 PM -0400
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 (UPI) -- The U.S. National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases has announced five awards
totaling $4 million to fund a study of anti-radiation
treatments.
Officials said the grants from the NIAID, part of the National
Institutes of Health, will aid in the development of products
that can eliminate radioactive materials from the human body
following radiological or nuclear exposure.
"These new grants will help identify new drug candidates that
could be acquired by the strategic national stockpile of medical
countermeasures, which is available to the public after a
terrorist or nuclear attack or accidental radioactive exposure,"
said NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci.
The grants announced Monday:
-- Raymond Bergeron, University of Florida-Gainesville, $1
million.
-- Tatiana Levitskaia, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory,
Richland, Wash., $725,000.
-- Scott C. Miller, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt
Lake City, $675,000.
-- Kenneth Raymond, University of California-Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, Berkeley, Calif., $998,325.
-- Charles Timchalk, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory,
Richland, Wash., $599,747.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
51 AFP: Aussie PM rejects India plea for uranium, but signals change ahead -
September 25, 03:56 PM
SYDNEY (AFP) - Australia will not sell uranium to nuclear-armed
India for the moment, Prime Minister John Howard said, as India
reportedly pressed for a change in Canberra's policy.
Howard said nothing had happened to make it abandon its stand
against selling uranium to countries that refuse to sign the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT).
"Certainly our policy to date has been to prohibit sales to
countries which are not signatories to the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty," Howard told Australian Associated
Press news agency.
"And that's why at the moment we couldn't, without changing
policy, sell to India, but we can to China."
However, he said the government was open to change, the prime
minister signalled.
"As time goes by, if India were to meet safeguard obligations,
some Australians would see it as anomalous that we would sell
uranium to China, but not India," Howard said.
The Fairfax newspaper group reported Monday that India is urging
the Australian government to change its policy and supply
uranium for the country's nuclear reactors.
But the government is divided on the issue, with Foreign
Minister Alexander Downer and Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile
opposed to abandoning the policy, according to Fairfax.
Australia, which has the world's largest known reserves of the
nuclear fuel, prohibits the sale of uranium to countries that
have not signed the NPT.
The national security adviser to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh, M K Narayanan, and Singh's spokesman Sanjay Baru told
Fairfax they wanted Australia to reconsider, but insisted that a
refusal would not hurt the relationship between the two
countries.
India first requested the policy shift in March that it be
permitted to import Australian uranium, and the request was
still being considered by the government, Howard told AAP.
The moves came as the US Senate prepared to consider a
controversial civilian nuclear energy deal, already passed by
the House of Representatives, that would reverse three decades
of US policy restricting India's access to nuclear technology.
Copyright © 2006 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
52 The Age: Howard signals option of uranium sales to India -
www.theage.com.au
Katharine Murphy
September 26, 2006
PRIME Minister John Howard has again flagged the possibility of
Australia selling uranium to India, despite strong resistance
from Government ranks.
Mr Howard said yesterday that if India observed international
safeguards then Australia could change its policy, which bans
selling uranium to countries that have not signed the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty.
"As time goes by, if India were to meet safeguard obligations,
some Australians would see it as anomalous that we would sell
uranium to China, but not India," Mr Howard said yesterday.
But Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile declared Australia's policy
would remain unchanged.
"Our policy remains the same as it has been," Mr Vaile told the
ABC. "The way we addressed this issue with China, we maintained
we could not do business with China until we had the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty signed and in place, and that is the
policy that we would apply today with India," he said.
India made a formal request in March to buy Australian uranium,
and Mr Howard indicated this year that Australia could shift its
policy to take advantage of India's anticipated increasing
demand for uranium. He said yesterday the issue was under
consideration.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Mr Vaile have been less
enthusiastic about any change to Australia's longstanding
policy. Labor is opposed to selling yellowcake to countries that
have not signed the treaty.
The idea has been opposed in discussions in the Government party
room.
The United States is pursuing a co-operation agreement with
India, despite its not signing the treaty — a move that has
raised the possibility of Australia following suit to take
advantage of India's potential as a market.
An Indian official said this week that the country was still
interested in obtaining Australian uranium. "The US, Russia, the
UK have recognised why we need nuclear energy and they are going
out of their way to assist, and we would hope that Australia
would see it," he said.
Labor called on the Government to clarify its contradictory
signals on Australian uranium sales to India.
"Labor welcomes India's recent commitment to meeting
international nuclear safeguards and the fact that India is not
a proliferating country despite its strategic nuclear program —
but the fact remains that it is not a signatory to the NPT," ALP
resources spokesman Martin Ferguson said. "As the world's
second-biggest supplier of uranium, Australia cannot have one
set of rules for some countries and another set for others."
When you see news happening: SMS/MMS: 0406 THE AGE (0406 843
243), or us.
*****************************************************************
53 Journal Gazette: Uranium demand booming
09/25/2006 |
Mon, Sep. 25, 2006 email this print this
Veteran companies are unable to meet production needs
By Catherine Tsai Associated Press
Associated Press photos
Cotter Corp. manager John Hamrick walks through the property
of the now-closed Cotter Uranium Mill in Cañon City, Colo.
Vintage control room equipment is in the process of being
dismantled at the Shootaring Mill north of Ticaboo, Utah.
CANON CITY, Colo. Its dead silent at the Cotter Corp. uranium
mill outside this southern Colorado prison town just one
driveway down from a golf course. Steam should be rising from
the boiler. A loader should be moving ore to the mill to be
turned into yellowcake.
But the mill is shut down and there are just 34 employees here
instead of 115. Trucks that once hauled ore 300 miles from
southwestern Colorado have been idled. The mines are on standby,
despite a growing interest in uranium across the West and around
the world.
While uranium prices have roughly tripled from $15 a pound in
2002, Cotter officials figure the price will have to reach $60
before the mill is up and running again.
Uranium potentially could hit that price as soon as early next
year, if prices keep rising at the same pace as they have been,
said Nick Carter of The Ux Consulting Co., a consultant to the
uranium mining industry.
Industry observers say everything from world events to uranium
production and expansion worldwide will affect how high uranium
prices go, but for now demand is outstripping supply. Given how
much time it can take to ramp up production, demand is expected
to stay strong at least for the next year or two.
Cotter Corp. President Amory Quinn, vice president of uranium
operations for Cotter parent General Atomics, said the Canon
City mill has aging equipment that needs tens of millions of
dollars in upgrades work that wont be done any time soon.
Today the price of uranium is not high enough to make it
profitable, Quinn said.
The surge in demand for clean, inexpensive electricity,
particularly in Asia, has led to the sudden new interest in
uranium. New mining claims are being staked, old mills are being
revived and the government recently licensed what will be the
nations second uranium enrichment plant in New Mexico.
But as old uranium hotspots like Uravan, Colo., Jeffrey City,
Wyo., and Ticaboo, Utah, get another look, veteran private
companies such as Cotter are on the outside looking in. Public
companies such as International Uranium Corp. and the juggernaut
Cameco Corp. along with their eager investors are going full
speed.
The hundreds of new, small companies trying to get in on the
uranium boom are led by entrepreneurs raising cash through the
stock market, said Tom Pool, an industry consultant with
International Nuclear Inc. in Golden.
Those companies either have to acquire old uranium assets or
start from scratch, meaning it could take years for them to
begin recovering or processing ore.
Cotters mill and mines have been around for decades, finding
and processing uranium and an accompanying metal, vanadium, that
is used to harden other metals.
Uranium was selling for above $60 a pound in todays dollars
when Cotters mill began running in 1958. Uranium prices
plummeted to the single digits in the 1980s and 1990s amid a
recession and the end of the Cold War, before they rebounded and
Cotter reopened four mines in Colorado in 2003 and 2004.
In 2005, the mines produced 255,000 pounds of uranium and
1.37million pounds of vanadium found in the same ore, said Jim
Cappa, chief of the mineral and mineral fuels section of the
Colorado Geological Survey. As recently as last fall, there were
115 workers here processing uranium and vanadium, mill manager
John Hamrick said.
But vanadium prices have been volatile. The average price was
$17.52 a pound in 2005 but was hovering around half that this
summer. And rising gasoline costs took their toll, making it
more and more expensive to haul ore from mines in the Uravan
area of southwest Colorado.
Any time you transport ore by truck 300 miles and fuel costs
are $3 per gallon, its a problem, Quinn said. We know uranium
is going up and the boom is near, but were not going to jump on
the bandwagon and lose another $30 million or $40 million.
Cotter closed its mines in November. The mill got its last
shipment of ore in February.
Mayor Bill Jackson remembers when Cotter first put up the mill
about 50 years ago. Tourism and state prisons drive the local
economy now, but back then, the town had 14 operating coal
mines, he said.
As time goes on, why, things change. We no longer have coal
mines operating, so the mining aspect to the community has
diminished, Jackson said. When you get that kind of job
fluctation, its bound to have some economic effect. Most of
those jobs are better-paying jobs.
It may be years before Cotter tries to revive the mill, Hamrick
said.
In the meantime, Cotter has tried to keep the mill humming with
plans to accept and dispose of radioactive waste from a
superfund site in Maywood, N.J. It later proposed accepting
waste to process from the former Sequoyah Fuels Corp. plant in
Oklahoma.
So far, state regulators have blocked both plans.
The Maywood proposal, in particular, prompted an outcry from the
community, many of whom remember when the Cotter mill was named
a superfund site in 1984 after contamination from unlined
tailings ponds seeped into the groundwater.
Lawsuits alleging health problems and property damage followed.
Residents formed Colorado Citizens Against Toxic Waste Inc.,
which has lobbied for the mill to be decommissioned.
The community has forcefully spoken to the Legislature, who has
forcefully spoken to the regulators, who put every conceivable
barrier in front of Cotter to doing these kinds of other
business activities whether it makes sense or whether its a
danger to the public or not, said Randy Roberts, a member of
the Fremont County Independent Outreach Committee.
The committee of volunteers says it keeps an eye on Cotter and
also works with a community facilitator funded by the company.
Roberts, the nephew of a Cotter employee who died of cancer,
said the companys most vocal opponents have responded based on
emotion rather than science.
Cotters dealing with more than just the economics of supply
and demand. Theyve got this huge wildcard in there involving
environmental issues, Roberts said. That has been as much or
more of a hindrance to their function than real live economics
and technology.
*****************************************************************
54 TCV: Nuclear Waste Disposal Issue Unresolved
by James Finch
September 25, 2006 10:48 AM EST
Over the past 24 years, each time your house or business
consumed a nuclear-generated kilowatt-hour of electricity, you
were billed by mandate of the U.S. government one-tenth of one
penny to pay for the storage of nuclear waste. And those pennies
add up. Since 1982, the Nuclear Waste Fund has grown to more
than $28 billion. The plan back then was to safely dispose of
the nuclear waste left over after providing 20 percent of the
nations electricity through nuclear energy. Instead, like a
ticking time bomb, about 40,000 metric tons of spent fuel rods
are chilling out in 141 concrete cooling ponds never intended
for long-term use. Many are within a few dozen miles of large
cities, such as New York, Philadelphia, Washington and Miami.
Now, at least nine states are heating up over the localized
nuclear waste issue. On September 13th, Illinois Attorney
General Lisa Madigan joined state attorneys general in
California, Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New York, Vermont and Wisconsin in calling on Congress
to reject legislation enabling the federal government to
designate nuclear waste storage facilities in all states with
nuclear power plants, superceding objections by the states
governor or state and local zoning and environmental laws.
The endless merry-go-round of deciding upon a final resting
place for nuclear waste has been studied for more than two
decades, has cost taxpayers more than $9 billion and has
actually been solved. Unless of course, you are talking about an
ideal solution which is required to be as satisfactory for up to
one million years from now as it might be some 10,000 years into
the future. That appears to be the most recent verdict lets
keep nuclear waste in temporary storage scattered across
geologically challenged locations, some near major cities, for
decades to come, because a minority of environmentalists are
uncomfortable with a well-studied, scientifically satisfactory
centralized disposal site in a remote location. Instead of
moving forward with a site, which will reportedly store the
waste safely for 10,000 years (and probably up to 80,000 years),
the environmental lobby would prefer a toxic risk for tens of
millions of Americans from overcrowded temporary storage sites.
They would like to stall matters until scientists can prove a
centralized storage site can survive all potential abuse for up
to one million years.
Unfortunately, even if Congress acts in early 2007, the
best-case scenario for a centralized nuclear waste repository
brings us to 2017. And that would require quite a few
politicians and bureaucrats coming to their senses. While they
haggle over whether the nuclear waste can be safely stored for
10,000 years (which a number of scientific studies confirm that
it can), or whether the waste site must store the spent nuclear
fuel for one million years, electricity consumers are annually
paying $1 billion for temporary storage.
The amount of nuclear waste accumulating since U.S. utilities
began powering our homes with nuclear energy comes to about
54,000 metric tons over the past forty years. To put this in
perspective, it would take up the size of a football field with
a depth of less than 10 yards. Nuclear energy does not generate
carbon dioxide emissions. By contrast, the amount of carbon
dioxide released into the atmosphere through fossil fuels is
enormous. According to one of the worlds leading environmental
scientists, James Lovelock, who recently authored The Revenge of
Gaia (Basic Books, 2006), one could freeze the annual carbon
dioxide emissions and create a mountain one mile high and twelve
miles in circumference. And thats each year. Using the same
yardstick since the 1960s, we would have 40 such mountains of
carbon dioxide, but one small football field of nuclear waste. A
Mountain Which Can Solve the Current Waste Disposal Issue
After passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) chose nine locations in six states as
potential permanent repository sites. The DOE whittled this list
down to five sites after various technical studies and
environmental assessments. After intensive scientific study, the
DOE chose its finalists: Yucca Mountain, Nevada, Deaf Smith
County, Texas and Hanford, Washington. Following lengthy
environmental studies of all three sites, Congress amended the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 1987 and designated Yucca Mountain
to be studied as the final destination for nuclear waste.
Weve been studying Yucca Mountain for 22 years, Steven Kraft
told us during a recent telephone interview. Mr. Kraft is
mechanical engineer who serves as the senior director for Used
Fuel Management at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and was
part of the Recovery Team following the Three Mile Island
accident in March 1979. It is the most studied piece of real
estate on the face of the earth. There isnt anything we dont
know about it.
Why didnt they pick someplace far away like Mongolia, Siberia or
Greenland? Youre making the assumption that somehow the
remoteness of a location makes it okay, Kraft responded. Youre
talking about places where there are geologic instabilities or
the geology is very difficult to understand. There are also
proposals suggesting ice sheet disposal, deep ocean disposal, or
simply blasting the waste into outer space. Yucca Mountain meets
all of the requirements, and I cant think of a better site,
Kraft explained. They have an awful good rock body down there
that has withstood a lot of scientific scrutiny. It is by
happenstance of geology they have a good location.
And what is the key to geology? What makes Yucca Mountain such a
good site is, in the formation below the repository, are
naturally occurring zeolites, Kraft pointed out. Water softeners
rely upon zeolites as ion-exchange beds. Zeolites strip out a
lot of the radionuclides and belays the flow of water, he
explained. By the time you get to the accessible environment,
the dose rate stays well below EPA standards.
No location is perfect. Even if all nuclear power plants were
turned off today, more than 108 million pounds of nuclear waste
would require disposition. You cant burn nuclear fuel pellets.
Nuclear waste is not flammable; it is too weak to explode. Each
year, the nations 103 reactors produce another 2,000 metric tons
of waste. It has to end up somewhere. The Yucca Mountain area is
geologically stable. The last volcanic eruption a small one
occurred 80,000 years ago. About 12 to 15 million years ago,
large eruptions north of Yucca Mountain laid down the sturdy
bedrock which formed this mountain.
The Yucca Mountain area only receives about seven inches of
rainfall per year. Ninety percent runs off the side of the
mountain ridge and mostly evaporates or is absorbed by
vegetation. The proposed repository is 1000 feet underground.
And the site is 1000 feet above the water table. Rainwater
seeping through rock fractures is negligible and would likely be
trapped inside the mountain. Inside Alloy 22 Engineered Barrier
Canisters
Within the first 1,000 years, about 99 percent of the
radioactivity in the reactor fuel will have dissipated through
the natural process of radioactive decay. For those who believe
the nuclear waste will be dumped in some hole in the ground as
some fanatical environmentalists falsely compared this to a
landfill disposal think again. The Department of Energy
designed rust-resistant canisters lined with titanium drip
shield to prevent water entry. A new alloy for these canisters
was created in 1987 called Alloy 22, which is a blend of nickel,
chromium and other corrosive-resistant metals.
In one DOE simulation, it was found the waste canisters wouldnt
begin to rust for about 80,000 years. Kraft told us, From the
presentations at the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board
meetings, the amount of time that the metal is actually
subjected to the corrosive environment is actually far less in
terms of hundreds of years. And whos to say how much technology
will advance over the next 10,000 or 80,000 years? Imagine for a
moment how much technology has changed our lives over the past
one hundred years, let alone over the previous 10,000 years. The
fact is we will all be long dead before a single drop of
moisture ever rusts one of those canisters. And so will the next
2000 generations of our great grandchildren.
As a result of the geological and man-made barriers, scientific
reports demonstrate the largest expected annual radiation dose
near Yucca Mountain would be 0.1 millirem. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) set an annual 15-millirem limit. The
EPAs dosage is about one-half what most of us get from cosmic
rays every year. A chest x-ray gives you a much higher dose.
Occupational standards for workers at nuclear power plants are
ten times higher. Clearly, both science and logical rationale
are being ignored when politicians and environmentalists dream
up such Twilight Zone guidelines for Yucca Mountain. When the
EPA standard of one million years was proposed, based upon a
1995 National Academy of Science study, it was unprecedented
worldwide, Kraft said. Is Transporting the Nuclear Waste to
Yucca Mountain Safe?
Critics worry about the dangers of transporting nuclear waste
from local sites to Yucca Mountain. They seem to overlook an
important fact. During the past 30 years, more than 3000
shipments have traveled across the United States over 1.6
million highway and rail miles without a single radioactive
episode. Used nuclear fuel has been safely shipped tens of
thousands of times outside the United States. Environmentalists
would have already pounced had there been an accident involving
radioactive releases.
The DOE estimates about 175 used fuel shipments will travel to
Yucca Mountain each year for 24 years, transporting between 300
and 500 containers. Numerous tests performed by Sandia National
Laboratories to destroy the canisters demonstrated the
ruggedness of the containers. Crashing trucks into concrete
barriers at 65 mph, trains broadsiding the trucks at 80 mph and
engulfing the trucks and canisters at crispy temperatures failed
to destroy the canisters. To get a certificate from the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), they have to pass very severe
accident tests, Kraft explained. My guess is that, at this
point, it will be fundamentally rail shipments with limited
trucking, but we had to analyze both.
Fear of terrorists? Before September 11, 2001, these (nuclear
storage facilities) were the most secure, heavily guarded
industrial sites there were, Kraft told us. And they have only
gotten even more protected. We have increased the number of
guards, the stand-off distance from the gate, and other things I
cant talk about because of the nature of the information. We do
have very good terrorist protection.
But what about on the open road? The DOE hope to construct a
300-mile railroad spur to connect the nations existing rail
system to Yucca Mountain. In an August 2006 Fact Sheet, the NEI
writes, The shipments are heavily guarded. Travel routes and
times for shipment are not publicly available; transport
vehicles are equipped with devices to prevent unauthorized
movement; and satellites track shipments constantly. Sandia
National Laboratories also simulated a terrorist attack using a
weapon 30 times more powerful than a shoulder-fired, anti-tank
missile. The result? The weapon made only a quarter-inch hole,
which the NRC estimated would release only about one-third of an
ounce of radioactive material, a minute amount of radiation
posing no risk beyond the immediate vicinity, and would be easy
to clean up. U.S. Left Behind in the Nuclear Renaissance?
In 1982, Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, amending
in 1987, levied a tax on consumers for electricity generated by
nuclear power, and set a 1998 deadline to begin accepting used
fuel. The U.S. government defaulted. 1998 has come and gone,
said Kraft. Its almost nine years later and 50 utilities are
suing. Lawsuits are in the multiple, multiple billions of
dollars. One wonders if the federal government will actually
honor this obligation. No one is being helped by this, Kraft
complained. The DOE has settled with Exelon and a few others to
repay their interim storage costs. Utilities have been paying
about $750 million per year since 1982. For example, Illinois
consumers have paid $3.5 billion since the inception of the
Nuclear Waste Fund; Pennsylvania consumers have paid $2.4
billion.
There are a lot of places that want to build new nuclear plants,
Kraft pointed out. There are about 30 on the boards right now.
But a lot of the communities are asking, Wait a minute, we still
have the spent fuel from the other reactor, when is all that
stuff going to leave the site?
Kraft explained, What the communities are not asking for is an
actual functioning disposal system, but a believable sustainable
plan for getting there. At the moment, the DOE program does not
look terribly sustainable to these communities. In each case
that wants a facility, the community is making it very clear we
want to know what the plans are for moving the nuclear waste
offsite. We have to be able to answer those questions.
He is earnest about moving Yucca Mountain into the operational
stage. Ive been waking up for the past 30 years wanting to solve
this problem, Kraft told us. The person that has to wake up is
Congress.
In a September 13th press release, the NEI wrote, To meet a
projected increase in electricity demand of 45 percent by 2030,
12 companies or groups of companies are developing federal
construction and operating license applications, and four
companies already have filed applications for early site permits
with the NRC. The first wave of those nuclear power plants could
be ready for commercial operation in the 2014 to 2015 time frame.
In a nutshell, U.S. consumers would be in a no-win situation in
the absence of nuclear power. More than 70 percent of the
electricity which comes from energy sources that do not bring
about greenhouse gases or are linked to smog and acid rain comes
from nuclear energy. The rest comes from renewables, especially
hydroelectric power. By shutting down 20 percent of our
electricity doesnt make sense for this country, Kraft argued.
Its not something the average ordinary homeowner is going to
want to have happen.
And the fate of the emerging nuclear revival, or the nuclear
renaissance, hangs by the decisions Congress must soon make in
honoring the governments obligation as the ultimate stewards of
the nuclear waste. We capture all our waste, said Kraft. We
store it all, we know where it is, we got it numbered and we
treat it with great respect. Ironically, with the ongoing
renaissance in uranium mining in the United States, if there
were no reversal by Congress, the yellowcake would end up in
Asia or elsewhere to fuel their galloping nuclear energy
programs.
In 2002, after more than 60 public hearings were held in Nevada,
then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham certified that Yucca
Mountain meets the site selection requirements. Both house of
Congress approved the Yucca Mountain site in July 2002. Yucca
Mountain is an approved project as far as Congress and the
President are concerned, concluded Kraft. And now we have the
license application to complete, get it through the NRC, and
start building it. Approval for Yucca Mountain came after one of
the most extensive scientific investigations in U.S. history.
The NRC review may take up to three years.
The remaining stumbling block appears to be the 1995 report by
the National Academy of Sciences, and adopted by the EPA,
demanding a million-year guarantee of safety at Yucca Mountain.
This came about while Yucca Mountain was passing every
scientific test for the original 10,000-year safeguard. Congress
can remedy this absurdity with legislation relieving this EPA
standard. In other words, it is time to get realistic.
Otherwise, the nuclear waste remains in limbo, chilling out in
the cooling ponds or dry casket storage instead of the Yucca
Mountain tunnels.
James Finch contributes to StockInterview.com and other
publications. His archived articles on uranium mining, nuclear
energy and the nuclear renaissance can be found at
DISCLAIMER: TheConservativeVoice.com and TCVdaily.com
© 2005-2006 The Conservative Voice. All rights reserved. Some
portions ©The Associated Press.
*****************************************************************
55 reviewjournal.com: EDITORIAL: Buying support for Yucca Mountain
Sep. 25, 2006
But even if Nevadans were interested, current offer is insulting
For all political and practical purposes, the Yucca Mountain
Project is broken beyond repair.
The federal government and the nuclear energy industry have
toiled for two decades to open a high-level nuclear waste
repository about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Lawyers have
punched holes in environmental standards, and audit after audit
has revealed glaring flaws in the scientific models created to
demonstrate the project's long-term viability. After spending
about $8 billion in taxpayer money over that period, all the
Department of Energy has to show for its effort is a big, empty
tunnel in the side of a ridge.
The nuclear energy industry is desperate to send the waste piling
up at commercial reactor sites around the country somewhere,
anywhere. That Nevada remains the industry's best hope for the
storage of spent fuel only intensifies the exasperation.
So the industry's lobbying arm now wants to build Nevada's
support for the repository the old-fashioned way -- by paying
for it.
On Wednesday, the Nuclear Energy Institute unveiled a bill draft
that would pay the state of Nevada $25 million per year to
accept the development of a temporary waste storage site at
Yucca Mountain. Once the first waste shipment arrives, that
annual payment would double to $50 million.
If the request were taken up by Congress as written, nuclear
waste could begin arriving in Nevada within two years of the
legislation's passage.
We all knew it would come to this, didn't we? With this
campaign, the nuclear energy industry formally acknowledges what
Nevadans have known for 20 years: There is no science behind the
Yucca Mountain Project. All the "studies" completed to justify
this boondoggle had a predetermined outcome. It's just taking a
long time to get there.
So now, finally, after years of muted debate in this state about
whether Nevada should drop its opposition to the repository and
negotiate with the federal government for benefits, the Nuclear
Energy Institute has submitted the first offer.
And is it ever low.
If $25 million per year were divided between every resident of
the state, each person would get about $10. If the money were
dumped into the state government's general fund, it might cover
the Millennium Scholarship program for a year. For $50 million,
the Clark County School District can build a new high school.
The standard for paying off a state's population was set by the
Alaska Permanent Fund, which collects fees and taxes from oil
and mineral exploration and production and offers qualifying
residents an annual dividend. This year's check is for
$1,106.96. That's per resident.
The Nuclear Energy Institute's proposition is the equivalent of
trying to impress a date by buying microwaved burritos at the
corner convenience store and expecting romance to follow. Yes,
prostitution is legal in parts of Nevada, but does the nuclear
lobby really think we're that easy?
There is probably no figure that would make Nevadans forget all
their health, safety and environmental concerns about the Yucca
Mountain Project. Certainly, the Nuclear Energy Institute's
current proposal won't move the repository any closer to
completion.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
56 CNW Group: Trigon Acquires Second Large-Scale Utah Uranium Project
September 26, 2006 QUICK
KELOWNA, BC, Sept. 25 /CNW/ - Trigon Exploration Canada Ltd.
(TSXV: TEL) announced today that it has entered into a Lease and
Option agreement ("the Agreement") to acquire 628 mining claims
and 3 state leases ("the Property") in the Henry Mountains of
southeastern Utah.
The Property consists of two claim blocks ("North Henry" and
"South Henry") covering approximately 14,000 acres south of the
town of Hanksville. Uranium resources in this region are hosted
in the basal sand units of the Salt Wash member of the upper
Jurassic Morrison Formation. The Salt Wash is the primary source
of uranium/vanadium ores on the Colorado Plateau.
The North Henry claims extend over a 15-kilometre length of
Morrison Formation outcrop, just north of the adjoining Congress
property held by Energy Metals Corporation. North Henry includes
down dip extensions of several near-surface uranium deposits
accessed by adits and workings between 1947 and 1962. Limited
drilling of North Henry by prior operators intersected uranium
mineralization ranging from 1 to 2 feet thick, grading 0.09 to
0.33 percent U(3)O(8).
The South Henry claims are northwest of the adjoining
Bullfrog property, held by International Uranium Corporation,
just north of its Tony M mine which is currently under
redevelopment with production anticipated next spring. South
Henry is centered about 15 kilometres north of the Ticaboo
uranium mill.
Sidney Himmel, President and CEO of Trigon, said: "The Henry
Mountains area has recently seen a considerable increase in
uranium exploration and mine development. We are pleased to have
secured a substantial property position there, underscoring our
commitment to develop a portfolio of drill-tested uranium
properties in past-producing districts of the southwestern United
States. As with our nearby Marysvale property, the Henry
Mountains property is capable of hosting large-scale uranium
deposits and we are moving to rapidly establish work programs
there to assess that potential."
Terms of the Agreement require Trigon to issue 500,000 shares
to Future Energy LLC and E. John McDonald and Associates LLC
("the Vendors") upon the completion of a detailed Lease and
Option Agreement, the completion of due diligence in respect of
the claims, and the approval of securities regulators. Trigon
will conduct a work program with cumulative expenditures of at
least US$750,000 by August 1, 2007. At its option, Trigon may buy
the Property by issuing an additional 500,000 shares to the
Vendors on or before August 1, 2007.
About Trigon Exploration Canada Ltd.
Trigon Exploration Canada Ltd. is a uranium exploration and
development company focused on the advanced-stage Marysvale
Project in central Utah, within a region that has produced nearly
one billion pounds of uranium. Trigon has recruited a
highly-qualified team of internal and consulting uranium
exploration experts to direct its efforts at Marysvale and
elsewhere in North America. Trigon also holds a portfolio of
high-potential diamond exploration properties within a
wholly-owned subsidiary. Trigon stock trades on the TSX Venture
Exchange under the symbol "TEL". There are 34,905,919 shares of
Trigon outstanding, 44,753,029 fully-diluted.
Should you wish to receive Company news via email, please
email ana@chfir.com and specify "Trigon News" in the subject
line.
The TSX Venture Exchange has not reviewed and does not accept
responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. This
release includes certain statements that may be deemed
"forward-looking statements". All statements in this release,
other than statements of historical facts, that address future
developments that the company expects to occur, are
forward-looking statements. Although the company believes the
expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are
based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not
guarantees of future performance and actual results or
developments may differ materially from those in the
forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual
results to differ materially from those in forward looking
statements include market prices, exploitation and exploration
successes, and continued availability of capital and financing
and general economic, market or business conditions. Investors
are cautioned that any such statements are not guarantees of
future performance and actual results or developments may differ
materially from those projected in the forward-looking
statements. The Company does not assume any obligation to update
or revise its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of
new information, future events or otherwise.
%SEDAR: 00021118E
For further information: please visit www.trigonexploration.com
or contact: Sidney Himmel, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Trigon Exploration Canada Ltd., Tel: (250) 317-3624, Email:
sidney.himmel@trigonexploration.com; Jeanny So, Broker Relations
Specialist, CHF Investor Relations, Tel: (416) 868-1079 x225,
Email: jeanny@chfir.com
© 2005 CNW Group Ltd.
PRIVACY &TERMS
*****************************************************************
57 WA Business News: Western Uranium float to cash in on uranium boom -
25-September-06 by AAP
Investors' new-found enthusiasm for uranium mining ventures will
again be on show tomorrow, when Perth-based explorer Western
Uranium Ltd floats on the stock exchange after a successful $3
million share sale.
With booming worldwide demand for uranium, and the federal
government's increasing focus on the mineral's export potential,
the Western Uranium offer of 15 million shares at 20 cents each
was oversubscribed.
The new kid on the mining block was set up to explore and
exploit the 60.1 square kilometre Coppermine Bore Project in
Western Australia's north, in a joint venture with Prairie Downs
Metals Ltd.
Western Uranium has the right to earn a 50 per cent interest in
Coppermine Bore through the expenditure of $1 million on the
project and a further 25 per cent interest after spending
another $2 million.
Speaking on the eve of tomorrow's float, Western Uranium
executive director Mark Hansen said the company had identified
15 prospective drill targets at Coppermine Bore, which will be
explored in the wake of its listing.
Mr Hansen said airborne surveys and rock chip samples taken at
Coppermine Bore indicated a "significant uranium mineralising
event" at the site - going so far as to compare the samples to
those in existence at the Olympic Dam site in South Australia."
"Rock chip samples collected by various companies during the
last three decades at Coppermine Bore have displayed a
remarkable correlation with the suite of elements at the world's
largest uranium deposit, Olympic Dam, which demonstrates the the
potential of the uranium project," Mr Hansen said.
"Australia is in a strong position to capitalise on the expected
growth in demand for uranium and Western Uranium is keen to play
its part through its exploration for uranium at Coppermine Bore."
Following the listing, Western Uranium will commence a two-year,
$1.35 million exploration program at Coppermine Bore, which will
include drilling, geological mapping, geochemical sampling and
geophysical surveys.
Further on the horizon, Mr Hansen flagged BHP Billiton Ltd other
uranium interests around the country and around the world.
"Western Uranium will remain focused on the exploration of
uranium at the Coppermine Bore and will also seek to identify,
evaluate and acquire further uranium interests in Australia and
overseas," he said.
The full text of a Western Uranium announcement is pasted below
Perth-based uranium explorer, Western Uranium Limited is pleased
to announce that its shares are expected to commence trading on
the Australian Stock Exchange at 10am WST tomorrow.
This follows the successful completion of its $3 million Initial
Public Offer on 17 August this year, in the wake of strong
demand from both retail and institutional investors. The IPO,
which closed oversubscribed, offered a total of 15,000,000
shares at 20c per share with two free attaching options for
every three shares offered. The options will have a strike price
of 20c and will be exercisable by 30 June 2010.
Soon after listing Western Uranium plans to commence a two-year
A$1.35m drill program at the Coppermine Bore Project located
230km north-west of the mining town of Paraburdoo in Western
Australia.
The Coppermine Bore Project is the subject of a joint venture
agreement with Prairie Downs Metals Limited and comprises a
single granted exploration licence within the Ashburton Mineral
Field.
As part of the JV agreement Western Uranium has the right to
earn a 50 per cent interest in the Coppermine Bore Project from
Prairie Downs Metals through the expenditure of A$1 million on
the Project and a further 25 per cent interest through
additional expenditure on the Project of $2 million.
Commenting on the successful completion of the IPO and ASX
listing, Western Uranium Limited Executive Director Mark Hansen
said, "Western Uranium has identified 15 prospective uranium
drill targets at the Coppermine Bore Project which will be
targeted in the first instance."
"The Directors of Western Uranium are excited about moving
forward with the exploration and potential development of the
Project with recent airborne surveys showing two substantial
uranium mineralisation anomalies, indicating a significant
uranium mineralising event at the Project.
"The Coppermine Bore was historically mined for copper and these
workings were eventually drilled for uranium in the 1970's.
"Rock chip samples collected by various companies during the
last three decades at Coppermine Bore have displayed a
remarkable correlation with the suite of elements at the world's
largest uranium deposit, Olympic Dam, which demonstrates the
potential of the uranium Project.
"Australia is in a strong position to capitalise on the expected
growth in demand for uranium and Western Uranium is keen to play
its part through its exploration for uranium at Coppermine Bore."
Mr Hansen said the two-year exploration program at Coppermine
Bore will include geological mapping, geochemical sampling and
ground geophysical surveys.
"Western Uranium will remain focused on the exploration of
uranium at the Coppermine Bore and will also seek to identify,
evaluate and acquire further uranium interests in Australia and
overseas," Mr Hansen said.
The capital raising was underwritten by Patersons Securities
Limited.
| | | © 2005 | All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
58 Rapid City Journal: Uranium mine study focus of meeting
By Journal staff
An informational meeting about the summer study of abandoned
uranium mines and the effect on private lands surrounding the
North Cave Hills will be next month in Ludlow, north of Buffalo
in Harding County.
The meeting will be at 6 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 11, in Ludlow Hall
at Ludlow. South Dakota School of Mines &Technology is
performing a study to evaluate effects on air, water and soil
attributed to historical mining activities in the North Cave
Hills region of Custer National Forest.
Funded by the Environmental Protection Agency's Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act program
and administered by the U.S. Forest Service, the initial study's
focus will determine the extent of environmental effects on
private land surrounding the North Cave Hills land unit.
The study is being conducted by James Stone and Larry Stetler of
Tech and Albrecht Schwalm of Oglala Lakota College. At the
meeting, initial results from the field studies will include:
- Summary of sampling and analysis methods used
- Overview of soil, sediment and surface/ground water results
- Air quality and wind tunnel studies results
- Tech and OLC students and K-12 science teachers educational
research opportunities
- Future studies planned for the South Cave Hills and Slim
Buttes land units.
The North Cave Hills study will be completed by the end of this
year. For more information about this study, go to
www.cavehills.org or contact: Laurie Walters-Clark, Sioux Ranger
District, P.O. Box 32, Camp Crook, S.D. 57724, call 797-4432, or
e-mail lwaltersclark@fs.fed.us.
Phone: 605-394-8300
©2006 Rapid City Journal. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
59 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Radioactive ash: Time to get moving -
Monday, September 25, 2006
It's good to see that residents are demanding that state
officials have all their Ts crossed and Is dotted when it comes
to removing radioactive ash from the Kiski Valley Water Pollution
Control Authority in Allegheny Township.
And it's no surprise that the public hearing on the plan to
remove the ash was sometimes heated. After all, the history of
the nuclear industry in the Kiski Valley hardly lends itself to
engendering trust among those living with its legacy.
But it is time to get moving on this plan. Additional safety
measures would be nice but it's clear they just aren't going to
happen. The Department of Environmental Protection's plan seems
adequate -- not a Rolls Royce plan but something that keeps
safety at the forefront while getting rid of the material.
The radioactive ash is what's left of wastewater from nuclear
fuels production plants in Apollo and Parks Township during the
1960s and 1970s.
The DEP plans to truck the waste to Lawrence County and then
ship it by rail to a hazardous waste landfill in Texas.
To ensure the public's safety, the DEP plans to use lined trucks
to transport the material. All of the trucks will be washed down
before they leave the site to make sure they are as clean as
possible before traveling on public roads. The liners on the
trucks will be sealed to prevent material from escaping en
route.
The Texas facility isn't specifically a radioactive waste
disposal site but it does house hazardous waste. That's a big
improvement from previous plans to simply dump the ash at a
municipal landfill and certainly is better than leaving it in
place, where it's vulnerable to erosion or flooding.
There's still time for the public to comment on the plan by
writing to DEP's regional office in Pittsburgh but let's be
reasonable. Making safety demands that are so onerous that they
delay or even kill this plan isn't helping anyone.
Reproduction or reuse prohibited without written consent from
Tribune-Review Publishing Co.
*****************************************************************
60 UPI: Serbia to relocate nuclear waste to Russia
United Press International - NewsTrack -
9/25/2006 12:44:00 PM -0400
BELGRADE, Serbia, Sept. 25 (UPI) -- Serbia's science minister
says nuclear waste from the Vinca Institute near Belgrade will
be completely relocated to Russia by the end of 2008.
Aleksandar Popovic, minister for science and environment, Monday
told reporters repacking of 2.5 tons of the nuclear fuel waste
will be carried out by three Russian companies over the next 12
months.
Popovic said negotiations on the transfer of nuclear waste began
in 2001 and wrapped up last week in Vienna, Austria, on the
sidelines of a conference of the International Atomic Energy
Agency.
Under the Vienna agreement, Serbia will be granted $12.7 million
from international donations to cover part of the transport
costs.
Popovic said a Soviet-type nuclear reactor was installed and put
into operation in the Vinca Institute in 1959. The reactor was
temporarily closed in 1984 and in 2002 it was permanently shut
down.
In 2003, the United States, Russia and the IAEA agreed the
nuclear fuel waste should be returned to the country of the
fuel's origin, in the case of Serbia it is Russia.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
61 AU ABC: Alice council petitioned to declare nuclear-free zone
ABC Northern Territory | Local News | Story
Tuesday, 26 September 2006. 08:01 (AEDT)Tuesday, 26 September
The Alice Springs Town Council has received a petition
supported by more than 70 local businesses to declare the town a
nuclear-free zone.
The full council met for the first time last night in its new
chambers.
The Arid Lands Environment Centre presented the petition of more
than 1,100 signatures to the council.
The centre's Nat Wasley urged aldermen to join others, including
their Marrickville council counterparts in Sydney, in declaring
the town nuclear free.
She said it was not legally binding and would not affect
materials needed for medical purposes, but would send a symbolic
message to the Federal Government that the region is not willing
to accept a nuclear waste facility.
Council has referred the petition to the corporate and community
services committee.
*****************************************************************
62 GAZETA.KZ: Can Central Asia become a nuclear-free zone?
By Oleg Sidorov, exclusively for Gazeta.kz
A noteworthy event took place in Central Asia in early September
that involved all countries including Turkmenistan.
The republics signed an agreement on creation of a Nuclear Arms
Free Zone in Central Asia.
The document was signed by the following officials:
Kassymzhomart Tokayev, Minister of Foreign Affairs, from
Kazakhstan, Alikbek Djekshenkulov, Minister of Foreign Affairs,
from Kyrgyzstan, Vladimir Norov, Minister of Foreign Affairs,
from Uzbekistan, Saimumin Yatimov, Vice Minister of Foreign
Affairs, from Tajikistan, Muhammed Abalakov, ambassador of
Turkmenistan to Kazakhstan.
The Central Asian countries have come to a conclusion that the
Agreement zone will extend to all five Central Asian republics.
The territorial waters though were not included into the Zone
limits. At the same time the conclusion of the agreement looked
rather as a half-measure, than as a happy outcome.
The main reason for the unfulfilled triumph became the position
of the nuclear five - USA, UK, France, China, and Russia.
While Russia and China supported the initiative the other three
declined.
It should be noted that the Agreement consisted of two parts:
The Agreement between the member states;
A protocol to be signed by the Nuclear Five.
Having signed the Agreement the member states undertook to
prohibit production, acquisition or stationing of nuclear arms
or their components on their territories. The peaceful use of
nuclear energy is not prohibited.
Having signed the protocol the Nuclear Five countries would
undertake to respect the zone status, i.e. not to station
nuclear arms on the territory of the zone and not to carry out
nuclear tests in this zone.
Parallel to these, the Nuclear Five countries would also provide
the so-called negative guarantees about non-usage of nuclear
arms against the Agreement member states and not to threaten
them with it.
The work on such international documents is usually quite long,
depending on the international political situation and positions
of the participants it can last from 3 to 10 years and more.
But this commonplace international practice has not functioned
in the issue of creation of a nuclear free zone in Central Asia.
The stumbling block that does not allow the USA, UK, and France
to sign the protocol was the requirement to Central Asian
countries to undertake prohibition of the transit of nuclear
arms through their territories.
But this requirement is only a top of the iceberg among
different concerns and demands of the Nuclear Three that like
everybody else pursue their own goals in the international
affairs.
Central Asia attracts the world leading countries due to many
reasons:
The significant nuclear resources;
The open struggles for the Caspian energy;
The transit opportunities of the Central Asian republics;
Possible creation of a cushion area before the threat coming
from Asia and the East in general.
But all these countries face unequal conditions here.
In this case it is the geographic position of the Nuclear Five
countries. If Russia and China are situated in the immediate
proximity of the Central Asian republics, the European countries
England and France and the North American continent are very far
from it and start to lose their influence on the region.
At the same time it becomes obvious that the above-mentioned
Nuclear Three are not going to sign the Agreement on a
nuclear-free area in Central Asia in the future either.
And the main reason for this refusal is the participation of the
Central Asian states in different military and political blocs.
That is such membership of the regional states in the
international organisations and blocs contradicts the interests
of these three powers that do not make part of either of the
existing regional blocs (the SCO, the CSTO, the EurAsEC.)
At the same time Russia and China are quite happy about such
even because they are members of all these organisations and
their signatures actually strengthen positions of Moscow and
Beijing in the region and weaken the US and European influence
in the same region.
Note
Presently there are nuclear arms free areas in Latin America,
South East Asia, and the South Pacific.
An agreement on creation of a nuclear arms free area in Africa
was prepared in 1996, but it has not come into effect so far.
Whenever materials from this website are used link/hyperlink is
obligatory.
Copyright © Internet Department of PH "Alma-Media", 2000-2006
*****************************************************************
63 DOE: USDA-DOE Announce More Speakers for National Renewable Energy Conference
September 25, 2006
WASHINGTON, D.C.Monday, September 25, 2006The U.S. Departments
of Energy (DOE) and Agriculture (USDA) today announced an
updated list of distinguished speakers for Advancing Renewable
Energy: An American Rural Renaissance, a conference jointly
hosted by the two agencies. The conference aims to get the best
minds together key stakeholders in biofuels, wind, and solar
energy to discuss and ultimately help accelerate the research,
development and deployment of alternative energy sources, the
crux of President Bushs Advanced Energy Initiative. Advancing
Renewable Energy is scheduled for October 10-12, 2006, at
Americas Center in St. Louis, Missouri.
Newly confirmed conference speakers include:
+ Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
+ Jim Talent, U.S. Senator, Missouri
+ S. Richard Tolman, Chief Executive Officer, National Corn
Grower Association and
+ Randall Swisher, Executive Director of the American Wind
Energy Association, will serve as Masters of Ceremonies
Leaders from government and industry will address renewable
energy topics such as: building supply and distribution;
encouraging demand; adapting and building infrastructure;
creating effective market models and partnerships; what the USDA
and DOE are doing to advance renewable energy, as well as other
timely topics. View the conference agenda at
http://www.AdvancingRenewableEnergy.gov/.
The following are conference keynote speakers to date:
+ Samuel Bodman--U.S. Secretary of Energy
+ Mike Johanns--U.S. Secretary of Agriculture
+ Red Cavaney--President and Chief Executive Officer, API
+ Dr. Keith Collins, Chief Economist, U.S. Department of
Agriculture
+ Thomas C. Dorr, Under Secretary for Rural Development and
Chairman of the USDA Energy Policy Committee
+ Charles O. Holliday Jr., Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, DuPont
+ Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
+ Alexander Karsner--Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy
+ Vinod Khosla--Founder, Khosla Ventures; Co-Founder of Sun
Microsystems; former Partner of Kleimer, Perkins, Kaufield &
Byers, a venture capital firm
+ Robert W. Lane--Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Deere
and Company
+ Dr. Raymond L. Orbach--Under Secretary for Science, Office
of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
+ Matthew Simmons--Chariman and Chief Executive Officer,
Simmons and Company International, a specialized energy
investment banking firm
+ Frederick L. Webber, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
+ Patricia A Woertz--President, Chief Executive Officer, and
Member of the Board of Directors, Archer Daniels Midland Company
+ Pat Wood III--Chairman, North American Advisory Board,
Airtricity, Inc.; former Chairman of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission
+ James R. Woolsey--Vice President, Booz Allen Hamilton;
former Director, Central Intelligence Agency
The following are conference panelists to date:
+ Joe Jobe, CEO, National Biodiesel Board
+ Mike Muston, Executive Vice President, Corporate
Development, Broin Associates
+ Don Endres, Chairman, and CEO, VeraSun
+ Craig F. Rockey, Senior Vice President, Policy & Economics,
Association of American Railroads
+ Amory B. Lovins, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer,
Rocky Mountain Institute
+ Dr. Robert T. Fraley, Executive Vice President and Chief
Technology Officer, Monsanto Company
+ Allen Rider, Steering Committee Member, 25x25 Ag Energy
Project, Former President of New Holland North America,
President, RGC
+ Alan Waxman, Managing Director, Goldman-Sachs
+ Thomas A. Wind, Professional Engineer, Owner, Wind Utility
Consulting
+ Joe Desmond, Under Secretary for Energy Affairs, California
Resources Agency
+ Greg Burger, President, CEO and Chairman of the Board,
Minnwest Bank
+ Professor Robert J. Thomas, Electrical Engineering, Cornell
University
+ Bob Dinneen, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Renewable Fuels Association
+ Robert B. Engel, President and Chief Executive Officer,
CoBank
+ Dr. Richard L. Sandor, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Chicago Climate Exchange
+ Representative Carl Holmes, Kansas House of Representatives,
Immediate past chairman National Council of State Legislators
+ Vijay V. Vaitheeswaran, Author, Global Correspondent, The
Economist
+ Dr. Donald L. Paul, Vice President and Chief Technology
Officer, Chevron
+ Michael Eckhart, President, American Council on Renewable
Energy
+ Kevin D. Best, Chief Executive Officer and Founding Partner,
Real Energy LLC
+ Dr. lenn English, Chief Executive Officer, National Rural
Electric Cooperative Association
+ Howard A. Learner, President and Executive Director,
Environmental Law and Policy Center
+ Dr. Dr. Dan E. Arvizu, Director, DOEs National Renewable
Energy Laboratory.
Attendance is open to the public. Anyone involved with renewable
energy is encouraged to attend, including transportation,
finance, and investment officials; other Federal and State
Government officials; and elected officials. All attendees must
register for the conference, including press, who may attend
without charge.
Attendees and press can register online at
http://www.AdvancingRenewableEnergy.gov/.
Media contact(s): DOE: Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940 USDA: Jim
Brownlee, (202) 720-4623 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
64 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Idaho National Lab replaces nuclear chief with few explanations
[seattlepi.com]
Monday, September 25, 2006 · Last updated 5:27 a.m. PT
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho -- One of the top spots at the Idaho National
Laboratory is changing hands, but officials are not offering any
explanations for the change.
Phillip J. Finck, a nuclear engineer at the Argonne National
Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., a suburb west of Chicago, will soon
lead many nuclear operations at eastern Idaho's national lab.
He replaces Jim Lake, the longtime associate laboratory director
for nuclear programs. The position reports directly to lab
director John Grossenbacher.
Idaho National Laboratory contractor Battelle Energy Alliance
announced the change, but provided no more information.
Battelle's release did not even mention Lake's name, though he
has held the post since the Columbus, Ohio-based contractor took
over research operations at the laboratory after winning a $4.8
billion federal bid in 2004. Lake also lead nuclear operations
under the previous contractor, San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp.
"Jim is considering other leadership options in the Battelle
family," said the final paragraph of an internal laboratory memo
from Grossenbacher that was obtained by the Idaho Falls
Post-Register.
[advertising] Laboratory officials said in a subsequent written
statement, "This change is a strategic redeployment of Battelle
senior leadership.m.anagement resources."
Officials declined to say more, including whether Lake would
remain in Idaho.
Finck joined the staff at Argonne National Laboratory, which is
managed by the University of Chicago, in 1986. He left in 1993
to join the French Atomic Energy Commission.
He returned to the Argonne National Laboratory in 1997 and was
named its associate laboratory director for applied science and
technology in April.
With 7,000 employees, the Idaho Falls-based Idaho National
Laboratory is eastern Idaho's largest employer.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119
(206) 448-8000
©1996-2006 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
65 Hanford News: HAMMER to open its doors Friday
This story was published Monday, September 25th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
For the first time since the Volpentest HAMMER training center
opened nine years ago, it's holding an open house Friday to give
the public an up-close look at the work done there.
The center has the feel of a Hollywood back lot, with lifesize
props such as buildings and train cars that can be set on fire.
But its purpose is far more serious.
HAMMER has provided safety, security and emergency response
training to thousands of workers, from Hanford nuclear
reservation workers to border guards who have traveled from the
other side of the world to learn new skills.
The open house is planned to honor the center's namesake, Sam
Volpentest, a year after his death, and to thank the community
for its support.
"We want to show off his legacy," said Jon Juette, a HAMMER
senior project administrator.
Volpentest is credited with having the vision for the center,
then the tenacity to get the federal money to build it.
He used to pull administrators aside when he would visit the
center and say, "Don't forget. It's for the workers and for the
nation's security," Juette said.
At the open house, visitors can see firefighters battle a
scorching hot fire at the propane truck prop and watch K-9 dogs
put through their paces at the Search and Rescue Building. The
border crossing mock-up area will have demonstrations of
equipment and methods used to detect smuggled radiological,
chemical and biological hazards.
A demonstration also is planned of the respiratory and
radiological training offered to Hanford workers and to
emergency responders who might come in contact with a "dirty"
bomb or other radiological hazard.
About 80 percent of the training done at HAMMER is for workers
at the Hanford nuclear reservation, who are cleaning up
radiological and chemical contamination left from the past
production of plutonium for nuclear weapons.
"They're doing some of the most dangerous work in the nation,"
Juette said.
The remaining 20 percent of training has been done for a wide
range of workers. They've included the U.S. Marine Corps
Chemical Biological Incidence Response Force, U.S. Army Rangers
from Fort Lewis, National Guard Civil Support Teams from many
states and more than 1,000 international border enforcement
officers from 29 countries.
The open house starts with an opening ceremony at 9:30 a.m. Then
guided walking tours of the HAMMER campus for 10 to 15 people at
a time will leave throughout the day from the administration
building. The last tour will leave about 1:15 p.m.
Buses will be used to shuttle groups back to the parking lot at
the end of the tours. Those who do not want to take the walking
tour may take a bus-only tour.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
66 Hanford News: Idaho National Lab replaces nuclear chief with few explanations
This story was published Sunday, September 24th, 2006
By The Associated Press
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) - One of the top spots at the Idaho
National Laboratory is changing hands, but officials are not
offering any explanations for the change.
Phillip J. Finck, a nuclear engineer at the Argonne National
Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., a suburb west of Chicago, will soon
lead many nuclear operations at eastern Idaho's national lab.
He replaces Jim Lake, the longtime associate laboratory director
for nuclear programs. The position reports directly to lab
director John Grossenbacher.
Idaho National Laboratory contractor Battelle Energy Alliance
announced the change, but provided no more information.
Battelle's release did not even mention Lake's name, though he
has held the post since the Columbus, Ohio-based contractor took
over research operations at the laboratory after winning a $4.8
billion federal bid in 2004. Lake also lead nuclear operations
under the previous contractor, San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp.
"Jim is considering other leadership options in the Battelle
family," said the final paragraph of an internal laboratory memo
from Grossenbacher that was obtained by the Idaho Falls
Post-Register.
Laboratory officials said in a subsequent written statement,
"This change is a strategic redeployment of Battelle senior
leadership-management resources."
Officials declined to say more, including whether Lake would
remain in Idaho.
Finck joined the staff at Argonne National Laboratory, which is
managed by the University of Chicago, in 1986. He left in 1993
to join the French Atomic Energy Commission.
He returned to the Argonne National Laboratory in 1997 and was
named its associate laboratory director for applied science and
technology in April.
With 7,000 employees, the Idaho Falls-based Idaho National
Laboratory is eastern Idaho's largest employer.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
67 Las Vegas SUN: Former clerk says Nevada Test Site documents were buried
Today: September 25, 2006 at 10:35:14 PDT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
LAS VEGAS (AP) - A former clerk at the Nevada Test Site nuclear
proving ground said records were destroyed that would help
workers under the Labor Department's Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program.
Sandie Medina, who spent 25 years cataloging toxic materials
reports, personnel rosters, safety meeting minutes and accident
logs, told the Las Vegas Review-Journal for a Monday report that
documents were removed from test site storage in late 1997 or
early 1998.
Medina said she learned later from a forklift operator that the
records from 1970 to 1995 were buried at a landfill at the vast
test site northwest of Las Vegas.
Medina, now a union project manager for the Southern Nevada
Building and Construction Trade Council's test site medical
surveillance project, said the records could help workers prove
compensation claims.
Ken Hoar, acting assistant manager for the Energy Department's
National Nuclear Security Administration denied worker claims
were affected by the disposal of documents that didn't contain
information about health and safety or exposure to radiation.
Industrial hygiene records would have been warehoused for
archiving, he told the newspaper.
"Is it a record or operational information? If it's a record we
should have it," he said.
Hoar said duplicate and triplicate forms were being scanned into
a computer database under a cataloguing project with the
University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Medina made her comments at a hotel last week while the
Presidential Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health met
in Las Vegas to discuss health problems faced by former test
site workers.
The board, which advises the National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health, has granted so-called "special exposure
cohort" status to workers with certain cancers who worked at
least 250 days at the Nevada Test Site from 1951 to 1962.
The test site, a government reservation the size of Rhode
Island, hosted 928 full-scale nuclear tests involving 1,021
nuclear detonations from 1951 to 1992. After 1962, testing was
done below-ground.
Test site spokesman Darwin Morgan said historical records from
1955 through 1992 have been supplied to a Boston University
researcher picked in 1996 to conduct medical screening and
surveillance of former test site workers under National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health oversight.
Morgan said the National Nuclear Security Administration has "a
very defensible and trackable system" of records.
"Our position is there is enough other records ... to establish
claims," Morgan said.
Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
68 Idaho Statesman: INL replaces nuclear chief
09-25-2006
Officials offer few explanations but said director is considering
other options in the contracting company
The Associated Press
IDAHO FALLS One of the top spots at the Idaho National
Laboratory is changing hands, but officials are not offering any
explanations for the change.
Phillip J. Finck, a nuclear engineer at the Argonne National
Laboratory in Chicago, will soon lead many nuclear operations at
eastern Idaho's national lab.
He replaces Jim Lake, the longtime associate laboratory director
for nuclear programs. The position reports directly to lab
director John Grossenbacher.
Idaho National Laboratory contractor Battelle Energy Alliance
announced the change, but provided no more information.
Battelle's release did not even mention Lake's name, though he
has held the post since the Columbus, Ohio-based contractor took
over research operations at the laboratory after winning a $4.8
billion federal bid in 2004. Lake also lead nuclear operations
under the previous contractor, Bechtel Corp.
"Jim is considering other leadership options in the Battelle
family," said the final paragraph of an internal laboratory memo
from Grossenbacher that was obtained by the Idaho Falls
Post-Register.
Laboratory officials said in a subsequent written statement,
"This change is a strategic redeployment of Battelle senior
leadership-management resources."
Officials declined to say more, including whether Lake would
remain in Idaho.
Finck joined the staff at Argonne National Laboratory, which is
managed by the University of Illinois, in 1986. He left in 1993
to join the French Atomic Energy Commission.
He returned to the Argonne National Laboratory in 1997 and was
named its associate laboratory director for applied science and
technology in April.
With 7,000 employees, the Idaho Falls-based Idaho National
Laboratory is eastern Idaho's largest employer.
*****************************************************************
69 KnoxNews: Cleanup of old reactor to resume
Work scheduled to remove radioactive fuel at ORNL's Molten Salt
after setbacks
By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com
September 25, 2006
OAK RIDGE - Previously aborted efforts to remove highly
radioactive fuel from an old research reactor will resume this
fall if the latest fix-it plan passes muster.
The U.S. Department of Energy last week began a "readiness
assessment" at the Molten Salt Reactor in concert with Bechtel
Jacobs Co., DOE's cleanup manager in Oak Ridge.
The restart of processing activities is expected in November if
all goes well, Bechtel Jacobs spokesman Dennis Hill said.
A series of hiccups, mishaps and disappointments during the past
couple of years has hampered progress on the nuclear project,
including a May 6 fluorine leak that brought virtually all work
to a halt. The project is about 20 months behind schedule.
The price tag, meanwhile, has grown to $42 million, about $10
million more than the original cost estimate, officials
confirmed.
The Molten Salt Reactor was built at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory in 1960 as an experimental facility to test new
reactor concepts, including the use of lithium and beryllium
salts to cool the reactor's fuel. The reactor also substituted
fissile uranium-233 for U-235 as a fuel, and the fuel wasn't
cased in conventional rods or plates. Instead, the molten salt
mixture flowed through the reactor chamber.
After nuclear operations ceased in 1969, the fuel mixture was
drained into two large tanks in the basement. A third tank was
used to store material that was flushed from the reactor's
process systems.
Those tanks, containing about 9 metric tons of highly radioactive
material, have been under continuous surveillance for more than
35 years.
The Department of Energy is obligated to clean up the old
reactor as part of the national Superfund program and agreements
with the Environmental Protection Agency and state of Tennessee.
Bechtel Jacobs and a team of subcontractors came up with a plan
to reheat the storage tanks one at a time and use a fluorination
technique to extract the U-233 - a strategic nuclear material of
potential use in weapons - and transport it to a secure location
at ORNL.
The team was able to successfully remove the U-233 from the
flush tank in mid-2005, but efforts to pump the molten salts
from the tank were postponed when a line clogged and workers
were unable to unclog it.
Bechtel Jacobs opted to shift attention to Fuel Tank No. 2.
Workers completed about 60 percent of the U-233 removal before a
fluorine leak inside the reactor building brought things to a
halt.
After an investigation and months of planning and preparation,
Bechtel Jacobs is hoping to restart the processing activities at
Tank No. 2, with work on Tank No. 1 to follow.
John Lyons, the project manager for Bechtel Jacobs, has
repeatedly stated that the Molten Salt project is a challenging,
one-of-a-kind effort that can present a range of technical
surprises.
Hill said restart of work at the reactor was delayed for a
number of reasons, including changes to the safety plan, added
training for workers, modifications to the fluorine supply
system, and preparations for the readiness assessment.
Once work resumes, it should take about two months to complete
the unfinished work on Tank No. 2, Hill said. After a two-month
transition period, work on Tank No. 1 should take about three
months, he said.
The completion date for fuel removal is August 2007.
Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Local Oversight
Committee, which monitors cleanup activities for local
governments in the Oak Ridge area, was hesitant to criticize the
schedule delays or the growing cost of the Molten Salt project.
"It is a unique project, and there is no precedent. It's going
to be full of unknowns and unexpected things," Gawarecki said.
"When you're dealing with potentially very dangerous materials
and something comes up you're not prepared for, you have to shut
down and sit back and evaluate the situation."
Safety is the most important thing, and the hazards are well
contained at Molten Salt, Gawarecki said. "They just have to
take it step by step," she said.
Once the tons of radioactive fuel salts are removed, they will
be transported to a nearby storage location until they are
prepared for disposal - apparently at the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant in New Mexico.
More work will be necessary at the Molten Salt Reactor,
including the final decommissioning and demolition of the
contaminated facilities. However, that work is not part of
Bechtel Jacobs' contract, which expires in 2008, and it probably
won't be scheduled for several years.
"The facility will be maintained in a safe and stable condition"
until then, Hill said.
John Owsley of the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation said work at Molten Salt was accelerated in the
late 1990s because of risks associated with a deposit of uranium
in a filtration system. That problem was eventually resolved,
and Owsley said the state and EPA are encouraging DOE to move
ahead with other cleanup activities at a safe pace.
"If they can do it safely, they need to proceed," Owsley said.
"If they cannot to it safely, they need to stop what they're
doing. We have no difficulty with the schedule as it's currently
being presented."
Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
The Molten Salt Reactor at Oak Ridge National Laboratory has been
shut down since 1969.
© 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
70 lamonitor.com: LANL helps reduce plutonium stocks
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS Monitor Assistant Editor
One of the unsung stories during the lengthy shutdown of
operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory that began in July
2004 was an exceptionally urgent operation to prepare packages
of purified plutonium oxide for international shipment.
The project was part of a major non-proliferation agreement
between the United States and Russia for disposing of large
quantities of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. The two countries
were supposedly on parallel tracks for realizing a mutual
commitment to eliminate 34 metric tons of plutonium from each of
their arsenals
According to participants, the LANL project was considered so
crucial and it was on such a tight deadline that the nation's
nuclear weapons chief Linton Brooks approved a unique exception
to the blanket suspension of all activities considered dangerous
at LANL.
Extraordinary precautions were put into place under heightened
oversight by the laboratory's senior managers and officials of
the National Nuclear Security Administration.
"We had to jump through many more hoops," said Randy Erickson,
the program manager at the time, now the lab's Deputy Division
Leader of the Decision Applications Division. "It was a push."
At the time work at the laboratory was suspended, a test batch
from disassembled nuclear warheads had been ground down into a
purified plutonium oxide powder and was ready for shipment to
France to be mixed with uranium oxide into four mixed oxide
(MOX) lead assemblies.
Lead assemblies are the first fuel samples used by a nuclear
power plant to confirm that a new fuel design will perform
safely and predictably over a period of several years.
According to the U.S. disposition plan, the MOX fuel will
generate nuclear power and then the spent fuel will become part
of the long-term waste repository.
Writing in a technical article published in early 2005, Erickson
and David Alberstein observed that the facility in France was
about to shut down and if the material did not get there in
time, the MOX fuel would not have been available until the MOX
Fuel Fabrication Facility was built at Savannah River.
If the MOX lead assemblies weren't made in France, the program
would be set back by three to five years, wrote Erickson and
Alberstein. "(The delay would) increase the cost of the U.S.
program by $1 billion, place the viability of the bilateral
program in jeopardy and compromise U.S. credibility in this and
other nonproliferation programs," the concluded.
As it turned out, the deadline was met. The lead assemblies are
now being irradiated in a nuclear reactor at Catawba Nuclear
Power Station in South Carolina, in accordance with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's authorization procedures.
NNSA Administrator Brooks wrote to the laboratory after the
crisis,
"Due to exceptional efforts by a number of individuals, a
combined federal and Los Alamos team accomplished the necessary
packaging safely, effectively and in time to meet the shipment
schedule."
Plutonium Disposition Program
Erickson gave an update on the plutonium disposition program at
a meeting of the Los Alamos Committee on Arms Control and
International Security this week.
The big news, he said, was the long-awaited signing of a
liability agreement between the United States and Russia, one of
a number of complications that have delayed the project.
The deal announced on Sept. 15 raised new hopes that a program
to dispose of large quantities of weapons grade plutonium in the
two countries would move forward again.
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman said in a press release that
the plutonium disposition amounted to 150,000 pounds between the
two countries and were enough weapons-grade plutonium for 16,000
nuclear weapons.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-NM, said in his announcement that the
agreement confirms the two nations' support for the disposition
project.
Because the two programs are supposed to be mirror images of
each other, so that one country doesn't get to far ahead of the
other, progress in Russia may help shore up confidence in the
United States.
Not everybody is on board with the disposition plans, however.
Just before the liability agreement was announced, a letter
signed by 59 groups, including the Nuclear Control Institute and
the Union of Concerned Scientists, went out to Rep. David Hobson
(R-Oh), opposing the plan to re-use plutonium, rather than to
immobilize it, which the groups consider to be a safer and more
straightforward process.
In the DOE appropriations bill passed by the House of
Representatives, the MOX program has been zeroed out by Hobson's
appropriation subcommittee, based on lack of progress on the
Russian side, although the Senate version of the bill increases
the funding level by $50 million.
The Russians have been skeptical that "immobilized" plutonium
cold not be "de-immobilized," Erickson said.
He added that there was a cost factor involved as well - that
immobilization would have required funding a third major
building at Savannah River.
Los Alamos National Laboratory's part in the plutonium
disposition is a $40 million a year project, employing about 80
people, providing the technical demonstration and equipment to
take surplus plutonium cores from bombs and warheads dismantled
from Pantex Facility in Texas and convert them into what will
eventually become nuclear fuel.
Steve McKee, who is now the program manager for the LANL project
said the liability agreement has no immediate effect on the
local effort, which will provide the final verification and
validation of the disassembly technologies.
"The test plan runs over the next two-and-a-half years," he
said. "We'll demonstrate the entire process from start to
finish."
The work includes disassembly of each different kind of
plutonium pit, validating models, establishing operating
parameters and equipment durability and maintenance requirements.
Assuming future hurdles in a highly complex project can continue
to be overcome, the equipment and procedures will then form the
basis for the Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility, which is
currently under design at Savannah River.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
71 PRN: Chevron and Los Alamos National Laboratory Launch Research
Project to Unlock Hydrocarbons Trapped in Oil Shale Formations
PR Newswire
SAN RAMON, Calif., Sept. 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Chevron
Corporation (NYSE: CVX) and Los Alamos National Laboratory today
announced the creation of a joint research project to improve the
recovery of hydrocarbons trapped in oil shales and slow-flowing
oil formations.
The goal of the Chevron-Los Alamos collaboration is to
develop an environmentally responsible and commercially viable
process to recover crude oil and natural gas from western U.S.
oil shales. The joint research and development effort will focus
on oil shale formations in the Piceance Basin in Colorado. The
work will include reservoir simulation and modeling, as well as
experimental validation of new recovery techniques, including a
form of in- situ (in-ground) processing that has the potential to
mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.
Chevron has applied to participate in the Bureau of Land
Management's research, development and demonstration leasing
program in the Piceance Basin. Chevron plans to use the 160-acre
lease to evaluate the technologies developed through its alliance
with Los Alamos, subject both to approval from the bureau and the
success of the research program.
Oil shales are sedimentary rocks containing a high proportion
of organic matter called kerogen that can be converted into crude
oil or natural gas. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the
United States holds 2 trillion barrels of oil shale resources,
with about 1.5 trillion barrels of those resources located in the
western United States, primarily in Wyoming, Colorado and Utah.
The research project will be conducted under the Strategic
Alliance for Energy Solutions launched by Los Alamos and Chevron
in 2004. The alliance supports Los Alamos in its mission, on
behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy, to advance the national,
economic and energy security of the United States through
scientific and technological innovation. It also supports
Chevron's strategy to develop innovative research and educational
partnerships within the energy industry.
"Energy security is one of the greatest challenges facing the
nation, and developing new sources of energy, including
hydrocarbons, is of paramount importance," said Terry Wallace
Jr., principal associate director for science, technology and
engineering at Los Alamos. "The Chevron-Los Alamos alliance links
important efforts in energy security with Chevron's research to
develop technologies that can brighten our energy future."
For Chevron, the collaboration with Los Alamos strategically
supports the company's goal to develop promising energy
technologies that will deliver additional energy supplies.
"Today's 'unconventional' energy sources, such as oil shales and
other tight formations, will become part of the core energy
supplies in the future, and our alliance can play a significant
role in unlocking the potential of these resources," said Donald
Paul, chief technology officer, Chevron Corporation.
"The alliance with Los Alamos has already led to several
breakthroughs in oil and gas technology, including the reduction
of ultrahigh casing pressures in deepwater wells and improved
well performance," said Mark Puckett, president, Chevron Energy
Technology Company. "Oil shale resources offer exciting potential
but present significant technological and economic challenges
that will be addressed by our alliance. We expect our
collaboration with Los Alamos will lead to further advances that
will enhance our ability to recover oil reserves in the U.S."
The research and development work by the alliance will be
performed at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M.,
as well as at Chevron's technology center in Houston. Over the
past two years, Chevron and Los Alamos have cooperated on a
variety of projects and breakthrough technologies, including
radio frequency telemetry, advanced sensor technology for the
collection and transmission of oil well data, and the mitigation
of deepwater ultrahigh casing pressures.
In addition to the alliance with Los Alamos, Chevron is
actively engaged in several other innovative partnerships with
research and development institutions, universities, government
laboratories and industry partners. Los Alamos has an active
industry partnering program and has worked over the past five
years with more than 250 large and small companies to address
national technology challenges.
About Los Alamos
Los Alamos National Laboratory (http://www.lanl.gov) is
operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC, for the U.S.
Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) and works in partnership with NNSA's Sandia and Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratories to support NNSA in its mission.
Los Alamos develops and applies science and technology to ensure
the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent; to
reduce the threat of weapons of mass destruction, proliferation
and terrorism; and to solve national problems in defense, energy,
environment and infrastructure.
About Chevron
Chevron is one of the world's leading energy companies. With
more than 53,000 employees, Chevron conducts business in
approximately 180 countries around the world, producing and
transporting crude oil and natural gas, and marketing and
distributing fuels and other energy products. Chevron is based in
San Ramon, Calif. For more information, visit Chevron's Web site
at http://www.chevron.com.
Cautionary Statement Relevant to Forward-Looking Information
for the Purpose of "Safe Harbor" Provisions of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Some of the items
discussed in this press release are forward-looking statements
about Chevron's activities. Words such as "anticipates,"
"expects," "intends," "plans," "targets," "projects," "believes,"
"seeks," "estimates" and similar expressions are intended to
identify such forward-looking statements. The statements are
based upon management's current expectations, estimates and
projections; are not guarantees of future performance; and are
subject to certain risks, uncertainties and other factors, some
of which are beyond the company's control and are difficult to
predict. Among the factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially are changes in demand for, and prices of, crude
oil and natural gas, the results of the research, political
events, weather and general economic conditions. You should not
place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which
speak only as of the date of this press release. Unless legally
required, Chevron undertakes no obligation to update publicly any
forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise. SOURCE Chevron Web Site:
http://www.lanl.govhttp://www.chevron.com
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
Reserved. A United Business Mediacompany.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************