*****************************************************************
04/02/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.77
*****************************************************************
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 UPI: UPI Intelligence Watch
2 BBC NEWS: Seized crew 'all admit trespass'
3 Reuters: Iran says no need for trial of British sailors |
4 UPI: Nimitz carrier group heads for Gulf
5 AFP: Rice ready for direct Iran talks if enrichment stops
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran outlines conditions for release of UK sailo
7 [NukeNet] Scotland: Labour green group seeks to oust pro-nuclear
8 RIA Novosti: Europe discovers Central Asia
9 Guardian Unlimited: Comment is free | Call that humiliation?
NUCLEAR REACTORS
10 US: [NukeNet] Close Oyster Creek! ZANNONI part 2
11 [NukeNet] Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Scandals
12 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet April
13 RIA Novosti: IAEA experts start inspection of NPP in southern Russia
14 US: The Rebel Yell: Rebel Science: Three Mile Island, Chernobyl inci
15 Creamer: No damage to Koeberg from crane incident - Eskom
16 US: FR NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
17 Reuters: Alstom in Russian nuclear energy joint venture
18 Prague Daily Monitor: Czech, Austrian parliaments to set up commissi
19 US: MHNN: IP3 returns to service after refueling outage
20 AU ABC: Labor inconsistent on nuclear power, says Howard.
21 US: The Courier: Getting to know ANO: Inside the reactors
22 US: Hawaii Reporter: Why Not Nuclear Energy in Hawaii?
23 Reuters: S.Africa fails to restart nuclear power unit
24 UPI: Outside View: Nuclear plant dangers
25 US: MiamiHerald.com: FPL idles St. Lucie reactor
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
26 US: Journal News: Check the label on KI pills, it may be time for a
27 US: The Spectrum: Give RECA to all states
28 US: Hawaii Reporter: HB 1452: The Depleted Uranium Scam
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
29 US: [NukeNet] Legislators slam door to nuclear waste site
30 US: The Hindu: Australia ready to sell uranium to India
31 US: DOE: DOE Extends Opportunity for Public Comment on the Scope of
32 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste to Meet in Rockvill
33 US: RGJ.com: Blast in trench could affect casinos, hospitals, homes
34 RGJ.com: Nuclear waste on our rails
35 US: Idaho Press-Tribune: Partnership aims to build nuclear energy co
36 US: Sofia Echo: FOREIGN INVESTORS INTERESTED IN URANIUM PRODUCTION I
37 US: Tonawanda News: Federal push may be needed to clean up landfill
38 US: AU ABC: Howard tours SA uranium mine
39 US: ABC: Uranium prices soar -
40 US: AU ABC: Group accused of running anti-uranium scare campaign.
41 US: NewsBlaze: Department of Energy Extends Opportunity for Public C
42 US: Reuters: Africa moves to recapture top uranium ranking
PEACE
43 reviewjournal.com: Anti-nuclear rally held at test site
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
44 SF New Mexican: Los Alamos scientist: X-ray machine right on schedul
45 SF New Mexican: Watchdog group says biosafety lab work jumps gun
46 Hanford News: HAMMER gets not to become regional center
47 FR DOE: Corrections and Updates to Technical Guidelines for Voluntar
48 UPI: DOE Inspector: Computers insecure
49 The Hindu: US lab comes calling
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 UPI: UPI Intelligence Watch
United Press International - Security & Terrorism -
4/3/2007 1:06:00 AM -0400
By LAURA HEATON UPI Intelligence Correspondent
WASHINGTON, April 1 (UPI) -- Current Iranian leaders have done
little to convince the West that they are trustworthy. But how
convinced is the Iranian public that their officials are telling the
truth about the nuclear program?
A new report by Pierre Goldschmidt, former deputy director general
of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and George Perkovich,
director of the nonproliferation program at the Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace, examines statements made by two of Iran's
top authorities and debunks them.
In early March, Iranian IAEA representative Ali Asghar Soltaneih
issued a statement to the IAEA Board of Governors arguing the
legality of Iran's nuclear program and the inappropriate nature of
United Nations sanctions given Iran's "goodwill" and "patience." The
statement was published by the Fars News Agency and appeared in
several prominent Iranian newspapers.
On March 21, the first day of the Persian New Year, Iran's Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khomeini announced in a national address,
"Until today what we have done has been in accordance with
international regulations" and "Western governments don't agree with
Iran processing nuclear power..."
Both leaders claim that Iran's nuclear enrichment actions have been
in line with international regulations," implying that Iran has been
victimized by the West. But as Goldschmidt and Perkovich show, the
statements can be refuted by comparing a timeline of Iran's
disclosures about its nuclear program with IAEA reports.
Goldschmidt and Perkovich's report also makes the important point
that the European Union and Russia have offered to help Iran expand
its use of nuclear energy, a position that even the United States
said it would support if Iran complied with IAEA regulations.
Although there is scant firsthand knowledge in Washington about how
the Iranian public views the nuclear program, Iran policy experts
offered some speculation.
"A lot of Iranians are pragmatic and know what it would mean to
cross that red line to build a nuclear weapon," said Cliff Kupchan,
director for Europe and Eurasia at the Eurasia Group, a risk
consulting firm.
Kupchan also said that it is difficult to assess the risk -- and how
the Iranian public could mediate the risk -- because the
international community does not have proof of Iran's intent to
weaponize its nuclear program.
"You can find all sorts of indications. There have been traces of
plutonium, and you don't make sandwiches with plutonium. But is
there enough hard evidence that would in my mind qualify as a
smoking gun? No," Kupchan said.
According to Geoffrey Kemp, director of Regional Strategic Programs
at The Nixon Center, a Washington think tank, Iranians understand
that their country has "a terrible problem with electricity supply."
But if Iranians were asked whether Iran should "walk away from the
(Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) and start developing nuclear weapons
... I think they would be very split on the matter," Kemp said.
Kupchan offered a similar viewpoint. "When you ask Iranians if they
want the right to a nuclear program and nuclear-produced energy,
they usually say yes, when you just walk around Tehran and talk to
people. ... If you ask an Iranian if they want a nuclear weapon,
they'll say absolutely not," he said.
But regardless of whether they want military capabilities, the sense
that Iran is being denied its rights is particularly stinging in
light of the nuclear balance in the region.
"There is a tremendous sense of a Western dual standard that allows
Israel to have nuclear weapons and denies them to Iran. The regime
is quick to exploit this," said Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow at the
Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
"Now (Iranian leaders) are building a sense that Iran is under siege
from the U.S. and U.K. to rally support. Iranians have been the
historic victims of intelligence plots from the U.S. and U.K., and
these kinds of regime tactics will resonate at home," Riedel said.
Asked whether the West can count on the Iranian public to question
the intentions of its leaders to ensure that they don't produce the
nuclear weapon Iranian claim to not want, Kemp was doubtful.
"We exaggerate the extent to which the Iranian public loves America
and hates the regime," Kemp said, noting that if a Western power
used military force against Iran, the public would more than likely
rally around the government.
"They're very proud people and they don't want to be deprived of
what they view as their legal right," Kupchan said. But for the
average person, concern about the nuclear program "stops there," he
said.
Although the Iranian youth has historically looked favorably at
Western culture, experts seem to agree that the West, and
particularly the United States, has significantly lost influence
among the public as Iran has become more isolated and turned inward.
"There are two clocks ticking here -- a nuclear clock and a reform
clock. The policy problem for the West is the nuclear clock is
likely to go ding first. ... Iran is much more likely to get nuclear
capability before the reform movement matures, so I don't think that
the man in the street is going to solve this problem," Kupchan said.
© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
2 BBC NEWS: Seized crew 'all admit trespass'
Last Updated: Monday, 2 April 2007, 12:32 GMT 13:32 UK
Capt Chris Air was among the captives shown in front of a chart of
the northern Gulf
The 15 Britons held by Iran accept they were picked up in its waters
despite the UK's insistence they were in Iraqi territory, Iranian
state radio says.
It reported film of all the Royal Navy personnel giving details
existed but would not be broadcast on TV because of "positive
changes" in the UK's stance.
Later, previously unseen images of some of the crew were aired but
their voices could not be heard.
According to Iran's ISNA news agency further footage of all the crew
"explaining details about their arrest in Iranian waters" would not
be aired because of "changes seen in the last two days in the
clamorous British government policies".
The film shown later on state-run Al-Alam satellite television cuts
quickly between several of the men and includes footage of a group
of three by a map.
The prime minister's spokesman said there was "a lot going on behind
the scenes".
"What happens next depends on the Iranian response," he added.
UK VERSION OF EVENTS
1 Crew boards merchant ship 1.7NM inside Iraqi waters
2 HMS Cornwall was south-east of this, and inside Iraqi waters
3 Iran tells UK that merchant ship was at a different point, still
within Iraqi waters
4 After UK points this out, Iran provides alternative position, now
within Iranian waters
The Foreign Office said it stood by its view the crew had been
detained against their will in Iraqi territory.
"We have not had consular access, we have made it quite clear they
were seized in Iraqi waters, and we want them released," a spokesman
said.
At the weekend, Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said a diplomatic
note had been sent to the Iranians.
Defence Secretary Des Browne has confirmed the government was in
"bilateral" communication with Iran over the personnel seized in the
northern Gulf on 23 March.
It is understood that one area under discussion is how future
disputes over the contested waters may be avoided.
BBC world affairs correspondent Emily Buchanan said the UK's "tough
stance" had seen it take the issue to the United Nations but there
were indications diplomats had become more wary of upsetting
negotiations.
Student protests
Four crew members have so far been seen on the Al-Alam satellite
television channel saying they had entered Iran's waters.
IRANIAN VERSION OF EVENTS
1 Royal Navy crew stray 0.5km inside Iranian waters
2 Iran gives set of co-ordinates to back up their claims
3 According to seized GPS equipment, the Royal Navy crew had
previously entered Iranian waters at several other points
4 Iran informs Britain of the position where the crew were seized,
inside Iranian waters
Both versions in more detail
The Foreign Office has said showing the group on TV is
"unacceptable" and it had "grave concerns" over the circumstances
under which any statements were made.
The first footage showed Leading Seaman Faye Turney and Nathan
Summers speaking.
On Sunday, Royal Marine Capt Chris Air and Lt Felix Carman were seen
explaining the incident.
The seven British sailors and eight marines, based on HMS Cornwall,
were seized by Revolutionary Guards as they returned from searching
a vessel.
On Sunday, Iranian students threw stones and firecrackers at the
British embassy in the capital Tehran in protest against what they
said was the "illegal entry" into their waters by the UK personnel.
* BBC Copyright Notice
*****************************************************************
3 Reuters: Iran says no need for trial of British sailors |
Mon Apr 2, 2007 6:53PM EDT
By Edmund Blair
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran said on Monday it wanted to resolve the row
over 15 British sailors and marines seized in the Gulf through
diplomacy and there was no need for a trial.
The 11-day dispute centers on where the sailors were seized by Iran.
Britain insists they were in Iraqi waters on a routine mission
authorized by the United Nations and the Iraqi government, but
Tehran says they were in its territory.
"This issue can be resolved and there is no need for any trial," Ali
Larijani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council,
told Britain's Channel 4 News television.
"There should be a delegation to review the case ... to clarify
whether they have been in our territorial waters or not. Through
sensationalism you cannot solve the problem," he said in a interview
from Tehran, speaking through a translator.
Britain's approach, which included seeking U.N. and European Union
backing to isolate Iran, has been strongly criticized by Tehran
during the stand-off, which has heightened tensions over Iran's
nuclear ambitions and helped pushed oil prices up $10.
"There is a difference of view between the UK government and the
Iranian government. This issue should be resolved bilaterally,"
Larijani said. "A guarantee must be given that such violations would
not be repeated."
Britain's foreign office had no immediate reaction to Larijani's
remarks. Continued...
© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
4 UPI: Nimitz carrier group heads for Gulf
United Press International - Security & Terrorism -
4/2/2007 2:49:00 PM -0400
SAN DIEGO, April 2 (UPI) -- The nuclear aircraft carrier USS Nimitz
was scheduled to leave San Diego Monday for service in the Persian
Gulf.
The Nimitz, which operates out of North Island Naval Air Station,
Coronado, Calif., is planned to retain the U.S. navy's current
two-carrier battle group deployment in the Persian Gulf. It is
expected to replace the USS Eisenhower and its battle group and
remain on station with the USS John C. Stennis carrier battle group,
the Navy Times reported Monday.
"The pairing of the carriers is part of a beefed-up presence of U.S.
and coalition naval forces "demonstrating the United States' ability
to build regional stability and bring long-term stability to the
region," the newspaper cited U.S. Naval Air Forces officials as
saying in a statement released Friday.
The Navy Times also reported that the carrier and its battle group
would be commanded by Navy Rear Adm. Terry Blake, and that among the
forces at his disposal would be Carrier Air Wing 11, Destroyer
Squadron 23, the guided-missile cruiser Princeton and guided-missile
destroyers Higgins, Chafee, John Paul Jones and Pinckney.
"Nimitz's air wing includes Strike Fighter Squadrons 14, VFA-41 and
VFA-81; Airborne Early Warning Squadron 117; Electronic Warfare
Squadron 135; Carrier Logistics Support Squadron 30; and Helicopter
Anti-Submarine Squadron 6," the newspaper said.
"The deployment will be Nimitz's third to the Persian Gulf in four
years," it said.
The dispatch of the Nimitz comes at a time of rising tensions
between the United States and Iran over Iran's refusal to head
United Nations Security Council resolutions to rein in its nuclear
development program. The Nimitz was also dispatched as Iran
continues to hold a group of British sailors captured from a British
naval vessel patrolling in the Persian Gulf.
© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: Rice ready for direct Iran talks if enrichment stops
Mon Apr 2, 7:13 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said
Monday she was open to direct talks with Iran if it froze its
sensitive uranium enrichment work.
"If Iran suspends its enrichment and reprocessing activities and we
go to six-party talks ... you would never rule out that it might be
useful at some point to have a bilateral encounter that moves
forward those (talks)," Rice said.
"But what you don't want to do, I think, is make this US-Iranian
negotiations over the Iranian nuclear weapon," she said.
Rice has previously said she was open to talks on Iran that would
include major negotiators Russia, China, Britain, France and
Germany, but has until now excluded the possibility of bilateral
talks with Iran.
The UN Security Council resolution has imposed sanctions on Iran for
failing to suspends uranium enrichment, which makes fuel for
civilian nuclear reactors but also produces material for atomic
bombs.
But Iran continues to defy the international community and has vowed
to increase its enrichment capacity, arguing that its nuclear
program is strictly for civilian energy purposes.
Iran also says it will not halt enrichment as a precondition to
talks on its nuclear program.
The United States and Iran have had no diplomatic relations since
Washington severed ties in 1980 in the wake of the seizure of its
embassy in Tehran by Islamist students.
A rare meeting between representatives of Iran and the United States
took place last month at conference of Iraq's neighbors in Baghdad,
when US ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad challenged his Iranian
counterpart over Tehran's alleged interference in Iraq.
Tehran rejected accusations that it was supplying arms and other
support to Iraqi insurgents, while Khalilzad described the exchange
as not "substantive" and lasting only a few minutes.
A new Iraq conference on the ministerial level is being prepared --
though no final date has been set -- at which Rice could have the
opportunity to speak with her Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki.
Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran outlines conditions for release of UK sailors
Julian Borger and Ian Black
Tuesday April 3, 2007
Iranian TV has shown previously unseen footage of four of the 15
British service personnel held captive. Photograph: Getty
Iran's most senior diplomat, Ali Larijani, called for a "delegation"
to rule on whether a British naval patrol entered Iranian waters
last month before his government would release the 15 marines and
sailors it is holding captive.
Laying out what appeared to be a vague road map for the freeing of
the British personnel, Mr Larijani said that, if it was found they
had crossed into Iranian territory, there should be an apology and
they would then be released.
He gave some conciliatory signals in an interview with Channel Four
News, saying the Iranian government was not interested in putting
the detainees on trial, but warned that might change if Britain
attempted to impose more international pressure on Tehran. "We are
not interested in this issue getting more complicated," said Mr
Larijani, the secretary-general of Iran's national security council.
"Our interest is in solving this problem as soon as possible. This
issue can be resolved, and there is no need for any trial. There
should be a delegation to review the case ... to clarify whether
they have been in our territorial waters or not."
Mr Larijani did not specify whether the delegation he was requesting
should be British or international, but he did say the issue should
be solved "bilaterally". His remarks could be a response to an offer
by Britain to send a team of naval experts and diplomats to discuss
how to avoid a repetition of the crisis. A Foreign Office
spokeswoman said last night: "We are still studying Dr Larijani's
remarks.
"There remain some differences between us, but we can confirm we
share his preference for early bilateral discussions to find a
diplomatic solution to this problem. We will be following this up
with the Iranian authorities tomorrow, given our shared desire to
make early progress."
However, British officials are adamant that the team of experts
would not be going to negotiate the captives' release, and would
focus on the future rather than on the March 23 incident. They said
proposed talks would ideally improve the current atmosphere, but
would not include acceptance of Iranian claims that the British
patrol had entered Iranian waters.
Earlier in the day, Iranian media noted "positive changes" in
negotiations with Britain over the crisis. They said that was the
reason they did not broadcast "confessions" of a territorial
incursion by all 15 captives, which Iran says it has recorded. So
far, four have been shown "admitting" that they had entered Iranian
waters.
The head of Iran's parliamentary committee on foreign policy and
national security, Allaeddin Broujerdi, seemed to echo the British
suggestion for talks yesterday when he told state radio: "There is a
need for a bilateral agreement to prevent such an event in the
future."
In seeking the captives' release, Britain has been seeking help from
Iran's allies. Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, has intervened,
the Guardian has learned. Mr Assad raised the issue with the Iranian
foreign minister, Manuchehr Mottaki, at the Arab summit conference
in Riyadh last Wednesday. It came shortly before Mr Mottaki told an
Iranian TV station that the captured sailor Leading Seaman Faye
Turney would be released shortly. The move followed a direct appeal
to Damascus by Sir Nigel Sheinwald, Tony Blair's chief foreign
policy adviser.
It came only five months after Sir Nigel visited the Syrian capital
in an attempt to persuade Mr Assad to distance himself from Iran.
British officials have been impressed by Syria's readiness to help
in the dispute with Iran, and have singled it out for praise in
recent days.
John Bolton, the Bush administration's former ambassador to the UN,
yesterday criticised the British government for its "weak" and
"passive" response to Iran over the captives. "If I were sitting in
Tehran, I would say, 'I played this card against the Brits and they
did everything but plead with me to give these people back'," he
told CNN. "I think that tells the Iranians quite a bit about
European resolve."
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
7 [NukeNet] Scotland: Labour green group seeks to oust pro-nuclear
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:43:21 -0700
http://www.sundayherald.com/
news/heraldnews/display.var.
1300488.0.labour_green_group
_seeks_to_oust_pronuclear_
miliband.php
Labour green group seeks to oust pro-nuclear Miliband
Labour activists are mounting a bid to oust the environment minister,
David Milib and, as head of the party's greenwing because he supports
nuclearpower.
Miliband, increasingly mentioned as a possible challenger to Gordon
Brown for Labour leader, was appointed president of the Socialist
Environment and Resources Association (Sera) in January. Sera is
affiliated to the Labour Party, and has been influential in formulating
its environmental policy for years.
Although Sera has always opposed nuclear power, Miliband has repeatedly
said the technology has a role to play in tackling climate change.
Now Scottish Sera members are spear heading a campaign to force Miliband
out. They say more than 30 members across the UK have pledged to sign a
letter demanding a meeting to discuss a motion calling on Miliband to
"graciously move aside".
The motion claims those involved in installing Miliband "have done much
to neutralise the authority of Sera within the energy debate", and he
should be replaced by "a candidate who is more inclined to loyally
represent Sera by being opposed to nuclear power".
Sera Scotland has also asked the association's UK executive to
reconsider Miliband's position when it meets in London tomorrow.
Although Miliband was chosen by the executive,his appointment has still
to be ratified at an annual general meeting later this year.
"It's not appropriate for David Miliband to be president of Sera," said
Claudia Beamish, Sera Scotland's energy spokeswoman. Beamish is also
first on Labour's list of candidates for the May elections for the South
of Scotland.
Radiation expert Dr Ian Fairlie, a Sera member in London for over 30
years, quit over Miliband's appointment. Sera had been set up as an
anti-nuclear organisation in the 1970s and had played a key role
opposing nuclear power ever since, he said. "To have this history
overturned on the whim of the present chairman and his pro-Blair
executive was too much."
But a spokesman for Miliband said the minister had no intention of
standing down as president, and suggested critics with in Sera were in
the minority.
"Most people will be delighted to have David Miliband as their
president. He respects that people have different views on nuclear
power, but his view is that, along with renewables and carbon capture
and storage, it will have a role to play if we are to have a low-carbon
economy."
Although Sera's UK chairman, Hywel Lloyd, stressed the organisation was
still opposed to nuclear power, he said there were only a handful of
Miliband dissenters."Most people think he's the right person to make
Sera influential in the party. His advantages hugely outweigh his
disadvantages."
10:09pm Saturday 31st March 2007
/By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor/
*****************************************************************
8 RIA Novosti: Europe discovers Central Asia
Opinion & analysis -
3/04/2007
MOSCOW. (Dosym Satpayev, member of the RIA Novosti Expert Council)
In the 1990s, the only geopolitical players in Central Asia were
Russia, the United States, China and some influential Muslim
countries. Later on, the European Union came on the scene. Some EU
members have been increasingly active in asserting their economic
and political interests in the region. It is enough to mention the
meeting of the Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Tajik, Turkmen and Uzbek foreign
ministers with EU officials, which has just ended in Astana, the
capital of Kazakhstan.
Indicatively, Germany initiated the meeting, and its foreign
minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, headed the EU3 delegation,
consisting of European Commissioner for External Relations Benita
Ferrero-Waldner and EU Special Representative to Central Asia Pierre
Morel.
Germany was the first European country to grasp the importance of
Central Asia for security and energy supplies. Berlin has already
announced that energy security will be high on the agenda during its
EU presidency. It has been a key topic in EU relations with
Kazakhstan. In December 2006, Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev
and head of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso signed a
memorandum of energy understanding in Brussels. The text
acknowledged Kazakhstan's key role as a producer of oil and natural
gas in the Caspian region, as well as the two sides' mutual interest
in promoting energy cooperation.
Symbolically, Polish President Lech Kaczynski paid an official visit
to Astana at almost the same time as the EU3's meeting. He is trying
to promote oil and gas contacts in two areas. First, he is trying to
persuade Kazakhstan to take part in the Odessa-Brody-Plotsk
pipeline, which is being actively lobbied for by Ukraine and Poland.
Second, he wants Polish oil and gas companies to be more active in
developing Kazakh deposits.
Energy tensions between Russia and the West are compelling the EU to
look for new sources of oil and gas. Together with EU Energy
Commissioner Andris Piebalgs, Turkish, Austrian, Hungarian, Romanian
and Bulgarian energy ministers have already endorsed a plan to build
the Nabucco gas pipeline linking the EU with Central Asia while
bypassing Russia. Its price tag is $5.8 billion. Kazakhstan has been
given a major role in the project. The West has unmistakably sensed
that despite its strategic partnership with Russia, Astana wants to
have as many alternative energy transportation routes as possible.
The project's only problem is Turkmenistan, which was also supposed
to take part in it. Because of Turkmen President Saparmurat
Niyazov's death, however, it is not clear whether this unpredictable
republic will be involved, although the EU is interested in both
Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan as energy suppliers.
Apart from energy, Germany is close to Kazakhstan for another
reason. At one time, Berlin actively supported the idea of granting
Astana the rotating chair of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2009. This year, Kazakhstan's
candidacy will be reviewed for the second time, and Germany's EU
presidency gives Astana hope.
Uzbekistan may also stand to gain from it. After the tragic events
in Andijan, where Uzbek troops fired into a crowd of protestors,
Germany was more loyal to the government in Tashkent, the capital,
than other EU countries, which demanded that tough sanctions be
imposed on it. Germany was largely motivated by a desire to keep an
air base on Uzbek territory for supplying its military in
Afghanistan. As opposed to the Americans, who had to leave their
base in Khanabad near Karshi (which was an independent military
facility), the Germans are renting an airfield at a civilian airport
in the town of Termez for their cargo aircraft. Today, Uzbek
President Islam Karimov would very much like the EU to lift the
sanctions, that were imposed on Tashkent for its refusal to allow an
international inquiry into the Andijan events, an embargo on arms
supplies to Uzbekistan in particular. In this context, Tashkent was
encouraged by a statement by Hugues Mingarelli, EU director for
Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia, to the effect that
Brussels intends to resume dialogue with Tashkent, and may revise
its decision on sanctions because isolating Uzbekistan had failed to
produce the desired effect. Karimov hopes Germany will help speed up
this process.
The EU has not been paying as much attention to Kyrgyzstan. European
politicians are unsure of the prospects of President Kurmanbek
Bakiyev, especially now that former Prime Minister Felix Kulov has
gone into opposition. Nor is it clear what policy the country will
pursue. The Europeans are more interested in Tajikistan because it
is close to Afghanistan, where NATO has its troops. Moreover, the
country is a major conduit for drug trafficking. Helping to resolve
this problem and counter religious extremism is the EU's second
priority in Central Asia after energy security.
At the same time, the EU should realize that the region represents
five specific political and socio-economic systems, five different
levels of integration into international relations, and five
different levels of risk in Central Asia. Most probably, Germany
will try to explain this to its EU partners. Hence, the EU should
build its relations with each country individually. Central Asian
republics have also abandoned a unilateral foreign orientation. Many
of them have been maneuvering just like Kazakhstan has, and they
will look at the EU through the prism of their economic and
political interests, exploiting the geopolitical struggle in the
region.
One of the aims of the EU3's meeting with the five foreign ministers
was to send out feelers for determining EU strategy in Central Asia,
with its many unpredictable processes and rather high investment and
political risks.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not
necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
9 Guardian Unlimited: Comment is free | Call that humiliation?
No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly
are a very uncivilised bunch
Terry Jones
Saturday March 31, 2007
The Guardian
I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the
treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally
entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of
treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for
example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as
for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black
headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the
world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For
God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's
what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their
heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to
take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the
captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these
unfortunate British service people are.
It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made
to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If
the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our
captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd
probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over
their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated.
And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters
home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into
line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their
captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many
privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay.
The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into
charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just
invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying
all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first
inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the
disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras!
What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their
British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make
sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of
exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold
for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A
common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of
their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the
ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's
all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will
confess to anything to get out of it.
And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV
appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The
newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the
footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed".
What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have
got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution
or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is
unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by
forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric
shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were
in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the
civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going
on.
As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would
not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our
servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer -
whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by
getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to
anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he
has in Iraq.
· Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python
www.terry-jones.net
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: Number 1 Scott Place, Manchester M3 3GG.
*****************************************************************
10 [NukeNet] Close Oyster Creek! ZANNONI part 2
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:48:27 -0700
Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583; Cell Phone - 609-335-8176
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Jeffrey Brown [mailto:jbnj@comcast.net]
*Sent:* Sunday, April 01, 2007 1:42 PM
*To:* Edith Gbur; Willie deCamp; Suzanne Leta; Richard Webster; Peggi
Sturmfels; Paula A Gotsch; Michele Donato; Janet Tauro; Crystal Snedden;
Adam Garber; Julia Huff
*Cc:* Eric Epstein; Norm Cohen
*Subject:* ZANNONI part 2
Oyster Creek plant hasn't lived up to promises
*Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 04/1/07*
BY DENNIS ZANNONI
Story ChatPost Comment
Go back 40 years. You agree to support the construction of one of the
first commercial nuclear plants in the country — Oyster Creek in Lacey.
You are told the electricity would be cheap and reliable. You are told
the plant would bring jobs and keep your taxes low. You are told it
would not operate more than 40 years. You are told the spent fuel would
be removed from the site after it is used. You are told the plant is
safe and that an accident was almost impossible. You are told an
emergency response plan wasn't needed. You are told no state oversight
was needed since the federal government would take care of the plant.
Fast forward 40 years. Our electricity rates are high, the plant is
unreliable and unsafe, the spent fuel will be in town forever, Three
Mile Island happened, we have a massive emergency response plan that
doesn't work, the state Bureau of Nuclear Engineering has 20 staffers
watching Oyster Creek and we have a weak federal regulator. Time is up.
Here's why:
Economy
The economic impact to the region from closing Oyster Creek is not a
significant reason for keeping Oyster Creek open. There will be more
money circulating in the economy after it shuts down. AmerGen will spend
around $650 million over a 10-year period to clean up the site. They
will employ around 300 workers, mostly unionized. Others will have
opportunities at other Exelon nuclear power plants and at the PSEG
nuclear power plants in New Jersey. The Lacey revenue from the plant
won't change since it is set by the Legislature. Finally, the site will
eventually be used by some business that will generate economic
activity, employ people and pay taxes.
Electricity
Losing Oyster Creek's electrical generation is not a significant reason
for keeping Oyster Creek open. New Jersey needs safe and reliable
electricity generation. Oyster Creek is neither reliable nor safe. First
Energy's combustion turbines, behind Oyster Creek, generate 100
megawatts safely and reliably. Also, PSEG will increase the Hope Creek
nuclear plant electrical output by 150 megawatts next year and to 200
megawatts within three years.
Environment
The environmental impact from the operation of Oyster Creek is a
significant reason for closing Oyster Creek. The impacts to the bay are
at the top of the list. If state Department of Environmental Protection
Commissioner Lisa Jackson requires cooling towers at Oyster Creek,
AmerGen will close the plant.
Security
The lack of spent fuel pool security at Oyster Creek is a significant
reason for closing Oyster Creek. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
required plants to spend billions after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Unfortunately, the NRC forgot about unprotected spent fuel pools. We
were attacked from the air and the NRC ordered plant owners to protect
the plants from a ground attack, which was never the intention of the
terrorists.
The 9/11 Report, the National Academy of Sciences and most reasonable
people agree that nuclear power plant spent fuel pools are vulnerable
from the air, not only because terrorists have struck from the air
before, but because it is easy to do. You can use a plane (big or
small), a helicopter (which can land right on top of the spent fuel
pool), or other methods to cause a spent fuel pool accident.
Spent fuel
The accumulation of spent fuel at Oyster Creek is a significant reason
for closing Oyster Creek. If Lacey permits more safety canisters and the
plant continues to operate, the amount of spent fuel stored in Lacey
will continue to accumulate.
Even if Oyster Creek closes, the U.S. Department of Energy, which owns
the spent fuel, has nowhere to put it. Lacey will have the spent fuel
for a very long time. Most of it will remain in a pool of water, never
designed as a storage facility, 100 feet above the ground, with only
sheet metal between it and you. I have seen the safety canisters
dropped, burned, sunk in water, hit by trains, planes and trucks but the
spent fuel pools magically became permanent storage facilities overnight.
The safest course of action is to close Oyster Creek, remove all the
spent fuel from the spent fuel pool and put it in safety canisters, and
force the Energy Department to take it all away.
Emergency preparedness
The emergency response plan is a major reason for closing Oyster Creek.
It lacks the confidence of the citizens it is intended to protect. The
population, escape routes and fear make the plan unworkable. I have no
confidence in the ability of the Oyster Creek operators to take proper
emergency response actions after a nuclear accident. In addition, Gov.
Corzine requested a review of the Oyster Creek emergency plan, which was
not done. The plan has not considered the consequences of a spent fuel
pool attack because the NRC will not let us review the available NRC
analysis. Finally, the public will be surprised to learn that
compensation from a plant accident will come only if "substantial"
radiation releases occur. You are on your own otherwise.
The NRC
The current state of the NRC is a major reason for closing Oyster Creek.
I have no confidence in the NRC's ability to make sure Oyster Creek
remains safe. After Congress forced the NRC to make the NRC nuclear
power plant oversight process more nuclear industry friendly, the NRC
lost its clout to make the plants safer. I see the effects of this
weakness all the time. Thank goodness the New Jersey Legislature created
the Bureau of Nuclear Engineering after the Three Mile Island accident.
The plant
I have been involved with Oyster Creek for 20 years. My goal was to do
what I could to make the plant safer. During that time, I have seen
plant owners, managers and operators, NRC regulators and inspectors, and
government officials come and go. I have remained, and I have the best
understanding of the overall picture of Oyster Creek. Oyster Creek's
time is up. Close Oyster Creek, clean up the site and ready the property
for the next business.
/Dennis Zannoni, Florence, was reassigned from his position as chief
nuclear engineer for the Department of Environmental Protection in
January in response to what he says is an unspecified complaint from a
Nuclear Regulatory Commission staffer. He has been on personal leave
since then but said he is returning to the DEP this week in a role
involving risk reduction./
StoryChat
Post a CommentPost a Comment
View all CommentsView All Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As usual Dennis, you neglected to include a few pertinent facts:
1. Until Yucca mountain or a suitable replacement opens, Oyster Creek’s
spent fuel will be stored onsite. Shutting Down Oyster Creek Won’t
change that fact.
2. The price of electricity generated by natural gas fueled sources is
the most expensive way to generate electricity, nuclear is one of the
cheapest. Shutting the plant down will only cause electricity prices to
rise more.
3. The majority of the other historical reasons you list for shutting
the place down occurred while the utilities running it were state
regulated.
Given these long running lapses in state oversight (where you were the
only constant), Perhaps they should have fired you a long time ago. Is
that why NO ONE from the state publicly supports your opinions?
Posted by: bl3ccch on Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:43 am
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a CommentPost a Comment
View all CommentsView All Comments
Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
11 [NukeNet] Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Scandals
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:42:24 -0700
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [NukeNet] Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Scandals
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:36:19 +0900
From: Citizens' Nuclear Information Center
To: nukenet@energyjustice.net
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Protest Statement by Citizens' Nuclear Information Center (CNIC)
2 April 2007
Power companies, government not qualified to operate nuclear reactors
On March 30th twelve Japanese electric power companies submitted
reports to the Minister for Economy Trade and Industry about
malpractices at their plants. These malpractices included data
falsification and fabrication, deliberately duping safety inspectors,
and failure to report problems such as uncontrolled criticality
incidents at Boiling Water Reactors and emergency shut-downs.
The reports included 306 cases of malpractice. Of those, 97 related to
nuclear power plants (104 if each incident is counted separately). In
addition, malpractices which occurred at experimental reactors, such as
those owned by the government's principal research agency, the Japan
Atomic Energy Agency, were reported. These included failure to report
emergency shut-downs and problems with control rods.
When three control rods fell out of position at Hokuriku Electric's
Shika-1 reactor in 1999, criticality continued uncontrolled for 15
minutes. In 1978, five rods fell out of position at reactor number 3 of
Tokyo Electric Power Company's Fukushima I power plant. On that
occasion criticality continued for seven and a half hours. And in 1998
34 rods slipped 15 cm out of position at Fukushima I unit 4, although
the reactor did not reach criticality.
Some of the malpractices breached laws and regulations, while others
did not, but that does not mean that there is any justification for the
incidents which were not actually illegal. Rather, it serves to
illustrate the inadequacy of the regulatory system. The endless
malpractices revealed in these reports demonstrate once again the
hollowness of the "safety first" mantra, which has been repeated again
and again over the years by the management of electric power companies.
Neither the power companies, nor the government are qualified to
operate nuclear reactors. At the very least, the licenses should be
revoked for those reactors where criticality incidents were covered up.
Even local and prefectural authorities which hitherto have supported
nuclear power have expressed outrage and declared that power companies
which cover up problems and take such a cavalier attitude to safety
cannot be trusted to implement pluthermal(1). The plutonium-based
pluthermal program should be canceled immediately. Operation of the
Rokkasho reprocessing plant should also be canceled immediately. As
long as active testing of the Rokkasho reprocessing plant continues,
more and more plutonium is being produced and Japan's breach of its
promise not to hold surplus plutonium(2) becomes more and more
egregious.
The malpractices revealed on this occasion are not isolated incidents.
They are a manifestation of the very nature of the nuclear industry.
Therefore, Citizens' Nuclear Information Center will continue to devote
itself to finding answers to the question of how to rid society of the
curse of nuclear power.
1. Pluthermal refers to using plutonium fuel (mixed uranium-plutonium
oxide, or MOX fuel) in light water reactors.
2. Japan promised not to hold surplus plutonium in response to
international concerns about nuclear proliferation. In fact, Japan now
has over 43 tons of plutonium with no prospect of consuming it.
Contact: Philip White, CNIC International Liaison Officer
+81-3-5330-9520
Citizens' Nuclear Information Center
3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003
Phone: 81-3-5330-9520
Fax: 81-3-5330-9530
http://cnic.jp/english/
cnic@nifty.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
*****************************************************************
12 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet April 5-7 in
Rockville, Maryland
News Release - 2007-07-041 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on
Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a public meeting April 5-7 in
Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, topics of interest to
NRC Commissioner Gregory Jaczko. In addition, the committee will be
briefed on plans for evaluating different human reliability analysis
models in an effort to propose either a single model for the NRC to
use or guidance on which models should be used in specific
circumstances.
The ACRS advises the Commission on licensing and operation of
nuclear power plants and related safety issues.
The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s Two
White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. The session on
Thursday and Friday will run from 8:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.;
Saturday’s session will run from 8:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. A
complete agenda is available on the NRC’s Web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/agenda/2007.
Anyone with questions or those wishing to make public statements
during the meeting should contact Sam Duraiswamy at 301-415-7364. To
pursue video conferencing services, contact Theron Brown, at
301-415-8066.
NRC news releases are available through a free list server
subscription at the following Web address:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.
Monday, April 02, 2007
*****************************************************************
13 RIA Novosti: IAEA experts start inspection of NPP in southern Russia
3/04/2007
ROSTOV-ON-DON, April 2 (RIA Novosti) - Experts from the
international nuclear watchdog have started a follow-up inspection
of a nuclear power plant in southern Russia, the plant said in a
statement Monday.
The International Atomic Energy Agency added the Operational Safety
Review Team (OSART) program to its services in 1982. Under this
program, international teams of experts conduct three-week in-depth
reviews of operational safety performance at individual nuclear
power plants.
IAEA experts conducted the first operational safety inspection of
the Volgodonsk NPP in 2005.
"Under the IAEA guidelines, a team of experts will conduct a
follow-up inspection of the plant after an 18-month break to check
the implementation of recommendations issued by the previous team,"
the statement said.
OSART will focus on the safety and reliability of the plant
operation. International experts will review the operation of the
plant and the performance of the management and staff rather than
the adequacy of the plant's design.
A report on the plant management and staff performance, such as the
organizational structure, management goals, and qualification of
personnel will be sent to authorities in the host country and to
IAEA member-countries.
The Volgodonsk NPP is located about 1,000 kilometers (610 miles)
south of Moscow. The plant features a VVER-1000 pressurized water
reactor that became operational in 2001.
RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
14 The Rebel Yell: Rebel Science: Three Mile Island, Chernobyl incident remembered
By Shirley Robinson
Up until the spring of 1979, the nuclear power industry had a bright
and promising future. Found to be relatively inexpensive to produce,
nuclear power was speculated by the chair of the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission to eventually serve as America’s primary source of
electricity and even grow so abundantly that it would become
“too cheap to meter” for American households. Hundreds
of power plants were planned for construction around the globe and
those already in service, being quiet and smoke-free, were
well-received by the public. Additionally, the nuclear power
industry possessed a nearly flawless safety record. Since the first
commercial nuclear reactor came online in the mid-1950s, there had
been one incident in Britain, in which a significant amount of
radiation had been released; however, it was deemed virtually
harmless.
The seemingly unstoppable increase in the momentum of the nuclear
industry suffered an abrupt snag on the morning of March 28, 1979.
At 4 a.m. near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the Three Mile Island
nuclear power plant experienced a meltdown that significantly
undermined the nation’s confidence in nuclear power. Although
it was one of the first nuclear accidents, it was unfortunately not
the last, as the tragic Chernobyl incident soon followed, causing
numerous deaths from high levels of radiation.
Exposure to low levels of radiation is a constant and unavoidable
part of being alive. Known as background radiation, it comes
naturally from atoms, the building blocks of matter. Although most
atoms are stable, some isotopes of certain elements have too much
internal energy, and in order to gain stability, they are forced to
emit the excess in the form of energetic particles or waves. One can
encounter measurable amounts of this radiation from cosmic sources
such as the sun, and by numerous terrestrial sources. Everything
from high altitudes, granite mountains, counter-tops and even
bananas, are all natural sources of unstable atoms.
Hence, radioactivity is far from being a manmade invention. However,
through years of experimentation, scientists have learned that by
concentrating certain radioisotopes, the decay process can be sped
up. This allows the energy that would have naturally been released
over a period of years to be rendered quickly and in large,
potentially dangerous amounts. Known as nuclear fission, this
process has risen atomic bombs and nuclear reactors.
The primary radioactive element mined from natural deposits and used
for nuclear power generation is Uranium. Although all of its
isotopes are radioactive, only U-235 is fissionable. When this
isotope is concentrated into what is known as a critical mass,
particles emitted by decay are captured by closely neighboring U-235
atoms; this prompts these atoms to also decay, releasing their own
particles to bombard other U-235 atoms. This chain reaction, when
carefully controlled, provides a constant and reliable heat source
that can be contained in the core of a reactor. The heat is used to
create steam, driving massive turbines to generate electricity.
In nuclear reactors, the core plays the role of the furnace of
conventional power stations. Different nuclear reactors use various
methods of extracting and transporting the heat generated by the
Uranium-loaded fuel rods within.
The reactor that malfunctioned that fateful day at Three Mile Island
was one that used pressurized water to flow through and absorb the
heat energy of the12-foot high, 100-ton core. According to reports,
a system malfunction caused the temperature of the core’s
water to rise, causing the reactor to immediately shut down.
Accordingly, a valve opened to the core’s water, releasing the
buildup of pressure. However, this valve remained open too long,
draining the core of nearly 250,000 gallons of vital water, and
exposing the radioactive fuel rods. Gauges in the control room
erroneously showed normal water levels, and the core laid uncovered
for hours with temperatures mounting.
The core eventually boiled dry, melting and disintegrating the fuel
rods and releasing what was reported as low levels of radiation to
the surrounding area. According to the Uranium Information Center,
over one dozen independent health studies found that, on average,
nearby residents were exposed to no more radiation than that
equivalent to an X-ray. However, many residents contend that
increased cancer rates and birth defects have resulted.
Although there were no reported injuries or deaths directly caused
by the meltdown, the incident initiated immediate changes in the
industry. Plans for hundreds of new nuclear plants were canceled.
Many partially built stations were abandoned or converted to
fossil-fuel burning plants. Only those plants near completion were
allowed to come online; however, estimated construction costs and
completion dates were greatly extended as new reactor designs and
safety mechanisms were federally mandated.
Although the Three Miles Island accident posed a legitimate health
concern for nuclear plant workers and nearby residents, the incident
was soon overshadowed by a tragedy half a world away.
On the night of April 26, 1986, a routine safety test at the
Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukraine assumed the title of
the worst nuclear plant disaster ever. A hypothesized confluence of
mechanical failure and human error led to a runaway reaction. The
power surged within seconds, the fuel elements ruptured and the
core’s water flashed into steam, blowing the 1000-ton cap off
of the reactor and scattering burning, radioactive material over a
15,000 square mile area.
Over the next 10 days, firefighters (many of whom became casualties
of the radiation) struggled to contain the burning core; some 5,000
tons of boron, sand, clay and lead were dropped via helicopter over
a blaze that burned so intensely that it could be seen from space.
Reports estimate that 10 percent of the core material was released
into the atmosphere, with fallout affecting virtually all of the
Soviet Union and much of Europe. According to the web site,
chernobyl.info, it has been estimated that 100 times more radiation
was released at Chernobyl than by the 22-kiloton atomic bomb
(“Fat Man”) that was dropped over Nagasaki, Japan in
1945.
Hundreds of villages were abandoned, and according to the Uranium
Information Center, over 300,000 people were evacuated and relocated
in the weeks and years following the accident.
An exact death toll is unknown. A 2005 report compiled by the
International Atomic Energy Commission and the World Health
Organization has linked 56 deaths directly to the accident. In 1995,
the Ukraine’s government blamed the accident for a 16 percent
rise in the death rate of its northern regions as well as a rapid
jump in the country’s cases of thyroid cancer. As of 2000,
4,000 cases of thyroid cancer were diagnosed in exposed children.
In the wake of the disaster, however, some promising news may be
developing. Although much of the region surrounding Chernobyl
remains contaminated and sparsely populated, plants and animals have
adapted well to the radioactive environment. As reported by the PBS
series Intimate Strangers, radioactivity increases the rate of
mutation in some microbes; by studying those of Chernobyl,
scientists hope they can find new strains that could be used to
actually fight cancer.
The destroyed reactor at Chernobyl has been sealed off by a concrete
sarcophagus: The IAEA estimates that 95 percent of the original
radioactive fuel remains onsite and is potentially contaminating
groundwater.
Despite the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl incidents, nuclear power
has remained an important source of electricity for over 40
countries. From 2001 figures, approximately 2,300 billion kilowatts,
or 19 percent of the world’s electrical needs, are supplied
through nuclear means.
Much of the undying allure of nuclear energy lies within the fact
that such huge amounts of energy can be harnessed from such small
amounts of mass. The fuel rods of typical reactors use Uranium
pellets which, being all of 2 centimeters in length, contain
approximately one third of a gram of U-235. As tiny as it sounds,
this amount can actually release as much energy as 2.5 tons of wood
or one ton of coal. Furthermore, some 126 gallons of oil or 17,000
cubic feet of natural gas would have to be burned in order to match
a Uranium pellet’s output.
Safety remains a primary problem, however, with the aspect of
nuclear storage becoming an increasingly important aspect. Fuel rods
that can no longer maintain a reaction remain dangerously
radioactive for approximately 10,000 years. Many countries have
designated depositories for old rods and/or recycle the remaining
radioactive isotopes within the spent fuel. Currently, the U.S.
stores much of its waste onsite at nuclear plants in cooling ponds
that are designed for temporary containment and are reaching maximum
capacity. Yucca Mountain, a remote area 90 miles North of Las Vegas,
has become the primary candidate for the nation’s future
nuclear storage facility. However, concerns about the geologic
stability of the area and the inevitable cross-country
transportation of waste have fueled debate about safety.
The Department of Energy is currently considering building a railway
system feeding into Yucca Mountain to help eliminate the dangers of
highway transportation feared by many.
The future of nuclear power remains uncertain, but the lessons
learned from its less-than-perfect past are influencing the science
and politics of the present.
©2000-2007 The Rebel Yell.
*****************************************************************
15 Creamer: No damage to Koeberg from crane incident - Eskom
3 April 2007
THIS SITE IS OPERATED AND MAINTAINED BY www.creamermedia.co.za
'Negligence caused Cape outages' - report
Koeberg unit to be out for at least three months
By: Mariaan Olivier
Published: 2 Apr 07 - 10:23
A contractor crane accident at Koeberg, which caused Eskom to
manually shut down unit two, did not cause any damage to the nuclear
plant, but the unit was still down after it failed to restart on
Monday.
Eskom said that unit two synchronised with the national grid at
05:00 on Monday morning, but that the turbine of unit two had been
tripped by its protection system when the power level increased.
"In accordance with the normal operating procedures, the reactor has
been placed in a safe mode while the cause of the turbine trip is
being investigated," the utility said in a statement.
Eskom teams assessed the possible damage caused by a contractor
crane, which came into contact with the lines that connect the
generating unit to the transmission system last week and established
that there had been no damage.
Koeberg unit one continued to operate at full power and the utility
said that the incident caused no power supply interruptions in the
Western Cape, which had been hardest hit by South Africa’s
power supply constraints over recent years.
MD for Transmission and designate CEO Jacob Maroga said, however,
that the national system was operating under tight conditions and
encouraged all consumers in the Cape to conserve electricity.
Edited by: Liezel Hill
Any re-distribution of this information is strictly prohibited.
Copyright © Creamer Media (Pty) Ltd
Website Credits
0.077s - 83pq + 3rq
*****************************************************************
16 FR NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
Doc 07-1625
[Federal Register: April 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 15729] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02ap07-113]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dates: Weeks of April 2, 9, 16, 23, 30, May 7, 2007.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
Status: Public and Closed.
Matters to be Considered:
Week of April 2, 2007
There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of April 2, 2007.
Week of April 9, 2007--Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of April 9, 2007.
Week of April 16, 2007--Tentative
Monday, April 16, 2007
1:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1, 2, & 3).
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
9 a.m. Briefing on New Reactor Issues--Environmental Issues (Public
Meeting) (Contact: James Lyons, (301) 415-3050).
This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov
.
12:55 p.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative) a. Entergy
Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) Docket No. 50-271-LR, LBP-06-20,
64 NRC 131, 175-82 (2006) (Tentative).
1 p.m. Briefing on Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES)
Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting). (Contact: Ann Ramey-
Smith, (301) 415-6877).
This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov
.
Week of April 23, 2007--Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of April 23, 2007.
Week of April 30, 2007--Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of April 30, 2007.
Week of May 7, 2007--Tentative
Monday, May 7, 2007
1:30 p.m. Briefing on Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs (FSME) Programs, Performance, and
Plans (Public Meeting).
This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov
.
* * * * *
The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short
notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--(301) 415-
1292. Contact person for more information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415-
1662.
* * * * *
The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet
at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policy-making/schedule.html.
* * * * *
The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation
to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or
the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another
format (e.g. braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability
Program Coordinator, Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100,
or by e-mail at DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * *
This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers;
if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the
distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington,
DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting
notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in
receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send
an electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov.
Dated: March 28, 2007.
R. Michelle Schroll,
Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07-1625 Filed 3-29-07; 11:35 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
17 Reuters: Alstom in Russian nuclear energy joint venture
Mon Apr 2, 2007 12:19PM EDT
By Guy Faulconbridge and Marcel Michelson
MOSCOW/PARIS, April 2 (Reuters) - French rail transport and power
generation engineer Alstom (ALSO.PA: Quote, Profile, Research)
signed a joint venture deal on Monday to build nuclear power plants
with Russia's state-controlled Atomenergomash.
Alstom will have a 49 percent share in the venture to build
so-called conventional islands -- essentially most of a nuclear
power plant except for the reactor -- and the partners will invest
over 200 million euros ($266 million) in cash and assets.
The joint venture is a flagship deal as Russia launches a new drive
to boost nuclear power, 20 years after the Chernobyl disaster
exposed the failings of Soviet nuclear management.
"This agreement is of major strategic and operational importance,"
Alstom Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Patrick Kron told a
signing ceremony in Moscow.
"It is obviously an entry point into the Russian market, which is
one of the top three countries for the future development of atomic
energy generation, along with China and the United States."
© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
18 Prague Daily Monitor: Czech, Austrian parliaments to set up commission on Temelin -
By Prague Daily Monitor/CTK / Published 2 April 2007
Prague, March 30 (CTK) - The establishment of a joint Czech-Austrian
parliamentary commission to supervise the safety of the Czech
nuclear power plant Temelin will be discussed by heads of both Czech
parliamentary houses, the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, next
Tuesday.
"We must find the rules of the game with which to enter such
institutions," Premysl Sobotka (the Civic Democratic Party, ODS)
told CTK.
Sobotka said that in order to establish the commission, the
postponed law defining the relation between both parliamentary
houses should be enacted.
"It is necessary to work at least on its draft. We need it and I
firmly believe that we will soon put together at least some of its
articles," Sobotka said.
The Chamber of Deputies started dealing with the preparation of the
commission, but it has not finished the debate.
There was no agreement on whether the commission should only include
deputies or also senators.
Vojtech Filip, a deputy chairman of the Chamber of Deputies and
Communist leader, said that Austrians wanted to have ten
representatives from the Austrian lower house in the commission.
The Czech Republic should nominate its representatives accordingly,
he added.
Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek (ODS), too, said that the Czech
representation in the commission should be consistent with the
Austrian proposal of ten members.
Topolanek said that the commission should contribute to Austria's
ratification of the information agreement on Temelin in order to
close the dispute over the power plant formally.
"Both chairmen have agreed that it would be good if both houses
cooperated and if certainly rivalry between them were eliminated,"
Martin Opatrny, spokesman for the Chamber of Deputies chairman, told
CTK.
Temelin, situated some 60 km from the Austrian border, has been
criticised by some Austrian and Czech NGOs as being dangerous. The
Czech Republic has repeatedly dismissed the claims.
This story copyright 2007 CTK Czech News Agency
The Prague Daily Monitor and Monitor CE are not responsible for its
content.
copyright 2007 monitor ce media services s.r.o. | all rights reserved
*****************************************************************
19 MHNN: IP3 returns to service after refueling outage
April 2, 2007
Copyright © 2007 Mid-Hudson News Network, a division of Statewide
Buchanan -- The Indian Point 3 nuclear power plant returned to
service minutes before 10 a.m. Saturday, after workers safely
completed the 14th scheduled refueling of the reactor. The outage
lasted 24 days and eight hours, almost one day less than the
site’s previous shortest outage of 25 days and 6 hours, also
at unit 3, in 2003.
“Each outage, our highly professional team has been able to
safely get more work done in less time which is a credit to their
commitment to safety and teamwork,” said Entergy Nuclear
President Mike Kansler. “This will to help ensure a reliable
supply of electricity, which is especially critical through the
upcoming summer months.”
Indian Point 3 produced more electricity in the operating cycle
before this outage, approximately 17.5 billion kilowatt hours, than
in any previous cycle. An operating cycle is the period of operation
between refueling outages.
Workers replaced 96 of the 193 fuel assemblies used during
operation. Fission of uranium heats water in the reactor vessel,
which is inside the plant’s containment building, to make
steam in a second non- radioactive water system that spins a turbine
to produce electricity.
Indian Point 2, which was unaffected by the shutdown, is operating
at full power.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and local public officials
were notified. Each plant produces about 1,000 megawatts of
electricity, approximately the amount used by 2 million homes.
HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's only
Internet radio news report.
*****************************************************************
20 AU ABC: Labor inconsistent on nuclear power, says Howard.
02/04/2007. ABC News Online
John Howard visited the Olympic Dam site today. (File photo)
(Lateline)
Prime Minister John Howard has used a tour of the Olympic Dam
uranium mine in South Australia to attack what he says is Labor's
inconsistency on nuclear energy.
Mr Howard visited the site today, where he welcomed plans for the
expansion of the BHP Billiton-run mine.
Mr Howard says Labor's opposition to nuclear energy is completely
inconsistent with its support of the uranium industry.
"It is the most inconsistent policy imaginable," he said.
"What is the consistency in a policy that says we believe in mining
uranium, we believe in exporting it but we completely close our
minds to the possibility that we might use uranium domestically for
the purpose of generating nuclear power?
"There is no consistency in that at all."
But Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has defended Labor's refusal to
consider nuclear energy in Australia.
Mr Rudd and Labor's environment spokesman Peter Garrett toured
Blackwater's BHP Billiton mine today, selling their plan to clean-up
the coal industry.
Coal provides thousands of jobs for the region and is the livelihood
of towns such as Blackwater.
Mining communities are anxious about a suggestion from the Greens to
phase out coal exports.
Mr Rudd believes that is not needed with Labor's $500 million plan
to cut carbon emissions by 2020.
He says Labor's focus on clean coal technology is the best way to
tackle climate change.
"If the alternative is a huge amount of government subsidy involved
in Mr Howard's 25 nuclear reactors around the country as opposed to
investing government funds in supporting clean coal technology, I'll
let you know very clearly where I'd rather go," he said.
"That's to support coal for Australia's future and clean coal for
our climate change future as well."
*****************************************************************
21 The Courier: Getting to know ANO: Inside the reactors
Russellville, Ark.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Editor’s note: This is the first of a seven-part series on
Arkansas Nuclear One titled “Getting to know ANO.†Next Sunday,
The Courier will focus on what everyone sees — the cooling tower.
For The Courier
Arkansas Nuclear One is a two-unit nuclear energy plant located 5
miles west of Russellville that supplies more than half of the
electricity used each year by Entergy Arkansas’ 667,000 customers.
ANO, with a total output of more than 1,800 megawatts of electrical
generating capacity, has been in service since Unit 1 began
commercial operation Dec. 19, 1974. One megawatt powers about 800
homes.
The site is a prominent Arkansas energy resource and a mainstay as
an economic asset for the Arkansas River Valley. For more than three
decades, ANO has served as a safe-operating, cost-effective source
of emission-free electric generation.
How is electricity generated at ANO?
Electrical generating facilities powered by nuclear energy, like the
two units at ANO, are referred to as nuclear, steam-electric plants.
This means steam is used to spin a turbine-generator to generate
electricity in the same way steam is used to spin turbine-generators
at fossil, steam-electric plants that burn coal, oil or natural gas
as heat sources for creating steam. The primary difference between a
fossil plant and a nuclear plant is the heat source used to create
the steam. Otherwise, fossil and nuclear plants generate electricity
in the same way.
A nuclear energy plant produces heat inside a nuclear reactor. This
heat is ultimately used to make steam. The reactor is housed within
the thick-walled confines of a robust containment structure built
with steel-reinforced concrete. Heat is created inside the reactor
by fissioning — which means to split — uranium 235 atoms. Atoms
are too small to see; yet a large amount of heat energy is released
from the nucleus of a U235 atom when it fissions. Fission occurs
when an additional neutron is absorbed into the atom’s already
crowded and unstable nucleus.
When a U235 atom fissions it separates into two smaller atoms and
releases two free neutrons that can be absorbed by two other U235
atoms causing them to fission. This releases more neutrons resulting
in a chain reaction within the reactor’s core. Fission rate, which
determines a reactor’s power level, is managed using
neutron-absorbing agents that control the number of fissions per
second.
ANO’s two units operate independently. Each has its own separate
reactor and turbine-generator system. If one unit is off line for
refueling or maintenance, it has no impact on operation of the other
unit.
What happens inside the reactor?
ANO’s two units are referred to generically as pressurized water
reactors. Water that circulates through the reactor and steam
generators for each unit is pressurized to prevent boiling.
Reactors for each unit are located inside separate steel-reinforced
concrete containment structures. Each reactor vessel has a
cylindrical shape and is about 40 feet in length and 15 feet in
diameter. Reactor vessels are made of carbon steel and lined with
stainless steel for corrosion resistance. The walls of each reactor
vessel are 6-8 inches thick.
Fuel assemblies are placed in racks inside the reactor’s core
located in the lower portion of the reactor vessel. During normal
operation the reactor system is filled with several thousand gallons
of highly-purified water referred to as reactor coolant. Four
9,000-horsepower electric pumps circulate reactor coolant rapidly
throughout the reactor system. As the coolant circulates, it absorbs
heat from fuel assemblies that are hot with heat from fissioning
U235 atoms.
Reactor coolant is heated to about 600 degrees Fahrenheit before it
is pumped into two large steam generators also located inside the
containment structure. Because reactor coolant is under pressure —
about 2,000 pounds per square inch — it does not boil.
As this super-heated coolant passes through thousands of small tubes
in each steam generator, it heats the tubes to about 600 degrees
Fahrenheit.
How is steam that spins the turbines created?
Highly-purified water used to make steam is pumped into steam
generators from a second closed system; water in the second system
remains outside the heated tubes. Because water in this second
system is under less pressure it boils when it contacts hot steam
generator tubes creating high-pressure steam.
Steam, packing the force of 900 pounds per square inch, is piped out
of the containment structure to the turbine building where it spins
large, pinwheel-like turbines in the turbine-generator system at a
rate of 1,800 revolutions per minute. These spinning turbines,
rotating at near the speed of sound, are connected to a long,
horizontal steel shaft with a large electromagnet on the end that
spins inside the generator.
Also inside the generator is a large coil of copper wire. As the
magnet spins inside the coil of wire, it excites subatomic
participles in the copper wire known as electrons causing them to
flow at the speed of light. This flow of electrons is electricity.
What does uranium fuel look like?
Fuel used at ANO consists of ceramic uranium fuel pellets installed
inside airtight fuel rods. Fuel rods numbering 236 are bundled
together to form a fuel assembly. About 360 slate-colored uranium
pellets about the size of the last joint of an adult’s little
finger are installed inside 15-foot long, silver-looking,
zirconium-alloy fuel rods.
The core of each ANO reactor is loaded with 177 fuel assemblies.
Each fuel assembly is 15-feet long, about 8 inches in diameter and
contains 89,680 fuel pellets. In all, the 177 fuel assemblies
contain about 15.9 million fuel pellets. Each fuel pellet possesses
energy equal to149 gallons of oil or nearly a ton of coal. Fuel
assemblies are used for about four and a half years before they are
placed in temporary, onsite storage facilities designed specifically
for safe storage of spent nuclear fuel.
Phil Fisher, senior communications specialist, nuclear
communications, contributed to this article.
Copyright 2007 Russellville Newspapers, Inc.
*****************************************************************
22 Hawaii Reporter: Why Not Nuclear Energy in Hawaii?
Monday, April 02, 2007
By Michael R. Fox Ph.D., 4/1/2007 7:23:53 PM
Sure nuclear energy is controversial and needlessly so. Any
controversy, no matter how contrived, paralyzes the debates and
forces decision makers to avoid the controversy or avoid sound
energy decisions. Antinuclear forces have known this and have
exploited it for nearly 40 years, with uncritical support of the
mass media. For decision makers and elected officials it is
political suicide to have rational discussions on nuclear energy. We
had better rethink this and the horrific price that is being paid.
Many people do not appreciate that Hawaii burns massive amounts of
oil to provide electricity. When flying in or out of Honolulu my
eyes turn to those oil tankers at anchor just off shore from Pearl
Harbor. Each can contain tens of thousands of barrels of oil. About
2/3 will be used to make gasoline and jet fuel. The rest will be
burned for electricity in just a couple of days. A nominal 84% of
Hawaii’s electricity comes from the burning of oil and most of the
remainder comes from the burning of coal. All of this is imported
from thousands of miles away. About 72% of this comes from
Indonesia, China, and elsewhere, and about 28% comes from Alaska.
These are very long lifelines for Hawaii’s economy and people to
depend on. These imports also lead to electrical energy costs of
around 22 cents/kw-hr, some of the highest cost electricity in the
nation.
For the record oil provides less than 3% of the electrical
production in the lower 48 states. That imported oil will be used in
3 different fractions. These are ground and marine transportation
(23%), jet fuel (32%), and electrical generation (26%). Thus, we can
easily see that oil is the life blood of the Islands, and this life
line is very long and very vulnerable to disruptions.
It was the long life lines between Japan and the Middle East oil
fields in the early 70s which threatened the entire economy of that
nation by the Arab oil embargo. At the time Japan was dependent upon
about 90% of its electrical energy from imported oil, not unlike
Hawaii. Japan responded by building a nuclear energy program. Today
Japan gets 30% of its electricity from 55 operation nuclear power
plants.
France, also dependent upon imported oil for electricity at the
time, underwent its own energy epiphany. Today, France gets 78% from
its 57 nuclear reactors. France, Lithuania, Belgium, and Slovakia
all get more the 50% of their electricity from nuclear energy.
Obviously, many of these nations are not crippled by environmental
movements there. Currently there are 435 nuclear reactors operating
in 30 countries. Worldwide there are 30 new nuclear power plants
currently under construction in 12 countries.
There are a number of reasons why other nations have chosen the
nuclear option. One is that fuel requirements are drastically
reduced with nuclear power plants. Consider the differing fuel
requirements of 3 different 1000 megawatt electrical plants with 3
different types of fuel. For sake of the discussion remember that
Hawaii has about 1600 Megawatts of installed electrical capacity.
The following are only estimates but they are good enough for a
simple discussion of electrical energy and fuels required.
A 1000 Mw(e) coal plant will burn abut 10,000 tons of coals per day.
A 1000 Mw(e) oil plant will burn about 44,000 barrels of oil per
day. A 1000 MW(e) nuclear power plant will consume about 10 POUNDS
of Uranium-235 per day. On a pound for pound basis uranium contains
more than 2 million times the energy as is in oil and coal. Its
waste volumes are correspondingly small. This is an extremely high
“energy densityâ€, which also dramatically reduces the fuel costs
for such plants.
Long ago the US Navy learned this from Admiral Rickover which is why
many of the ships in our Navy are nuclear powered, often at anchor
in Pearl Harbor. Some of the naval reactors are designed to outlast
the ships and never need refueling in 30 years or more. Although no
new reactors have been ordered in the US for 25 years, design
efforts have never stopped for building new safer reactors. New
reactor design improvements never stopped. The innovation continued.
One such advanced reactor design is being pursued by the tiny town
(800 pop.) of Galena, Alaska. For nearly 9 months of the year Galena
is isolated from the outside world. It electrical demands are met
with oil fired generators and the oil is barged up the Yukon during
a 3 months window of ice free barging. Electricity costs are about
28 cents per kw-hr. Galena city leaders are pursuing the use of a
new reactor of a new supersafe, small, and simple, of Japanese
design. The reactor would be designed with a 30 year core lifetime,
after which the core could be replaced. Because no fuel will be
needed during those 30 years the electrical costs will drop
dramatically. Try to imagine Hawaii having its electricity produced
in this way with minimum fuel costs, instead of the horrendous oil
costs we now pay.
Because of uranium’s very high energy density, other benefits
accrue. On a kw-hr for kw-hr basis, nuclear energy wins the
environmental contest hands down. In glass form such as in France,
the volume of nuclear waste is about 2-3 cubic meters per year from
each 1000 Mw(e) reactor. This is to be compared to about 1000 tons
of ash per day from a coal plant, plus the other huge volumes of
combustion gases such as CO2, SO2, NOx, etc. Nuclear energy
doesn’t emit a molecule of CO2, no controlled air pollutants such
as sulfur and particulates, and it doesn’t produce ground level
ozone, and no acid rain. The nuclear waste is radioactive and is
easily manageable, as the small annual volume suggests, and as
France, England, Japan, and others are demonstrating.
And labor organizations take note: tens of thousands of high paying
jobs have been exported to these foreign nations who are not so
hysterical about nuclear technology. In fact there is a roaring
economic competition between England and France to process spent
nuclear fuel from other nations. The price of fear to the United
States, including Hawaiians, has been enormous on many levels.
Hawaiian leadership should consider the consequences of 3000 mile
long life lines to Hawaii and the horrendous prices to be paid for
their disruptions. Why not reconsider an energy source which is
safe, domestic, lower cost, and environmentally benign. Leaders of
Hawaii: Consider yourselves advised.
Michael R. Fox, Ph.D., a science and energy reporter for Hawaii
Reporter and a analysist for the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, is
retired and living in Kaneohe. He has nearly 40 years experience in
the energy field. He has also taught chemistry and energy at the
University level. His interest in the communications of science has
led to several communications awards, hundreds of speeches, and many
appearances on television and talk shows. He can be reached via
email at mailto:foxm011@hawaii.rr.com
HawaiiReporter.com reports the real news, and prints all editorials
submitted, even if they do not represent the viewpoint of the
editors, as long as they are written clearly. Send editorials to
mailto:Malia@HawaiiReporter.com
www.HawaiiReporter.com
© 2007 Hawaii Reporter, Inc. | About Us | Terms of Service | Privacy
*****************************************************************
23 Reuters: S.Africa fails to restart nuclear power unit
Mon 2 Apr 2007, 10:46 GMT
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - One unit at South Africa's Koeberg nuclear
plant was still shut down on Monday after an attempt to restart it
failed, state power utility Eskom said.
The unit was shut down on Thursday to check for potential damage and
the start-up process took place over the weekend, with power moving
onto the national grid early Monday morning, a statement said.
"While the power level was being increased the turbine of unit 2 was
tripped by its protection system," Eskom said.
"In accordance with the normal operating procedures, the reactor has
been placed in a safe mode while the cause of the turbine trip is
being investigated."
Unit 2 was shut down on Thursday after a contractor's crane came
into contact with one of the lines that connect the unit with the
transmission system.
Eskom said consumers were being asked to conserve electricity since
the national system was still operating under "tight" conditions,
but no power supply interruptions have taken place so far.
Several years of strong growth have boosted electricity demand in
Africa's biggest economy, but this has not been matched by rising
power supplies and building new plants.
In January, factories, mines and homes lost electricity in a wave of
blackouts without warning, after several power shortages last year.
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved. | Learn more about Reuters
*****************************************************************
24 UPI: Outside View: Nuclear plant dangers
United Press International - Security & Terrorism -
4/2/2007 11:29:00 AM -0400
By HELEN CALDICOTT UPI Outside View Commentator
MELBOURNE, April 2 (UPI) -- Nuclear power plants are vulnerable to
many events that could lead to meltdowns, including human and
mechanical errors; impacts from climate change, global warming, and
earthquakes; and, we now know, terrorist attacks.
Statistically speaking, an accidental meltdown is almost a certainty
sooner or later in one of the 438 nuclear power plants located in 33
countries around the world. Human error, compromise, laziness, and
greed are implicit in the affairs of men; when these attributes are
applied to the generation of atomic energy, the results can be
catastrophic.
David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer from the Union of Concerned
Scientists, points out, nuclear power plants are like people: they
have numerous problems in their infancy and youth, they operate
relatively smoothly in early-to middle life, and they start to show
signs of stress and manifest pathology as they age. Every U.S.
nuclear power plant is moving into the old-age cycle, and the number
of near-misses is increasing. In a 13-month period from March 7,
2000, to April 2, 2001, eight nuclear power plants were forced to
shut down because of potentially serious equipment failures
associated with aging of their mechanical parts--one shut down on
average every 60 days.
According to John Large, a British consulting engineer, "Nuclear
power plants are almost totally ill-prepared for a terrorist attack
from the air" because nuclear reactors were designed and constructed
more than 50 years ago, well before the large airplanes in common
use today were ever conceived. Large points out that designs of
relevant nuclear power plants are easy to obtain in the open
literature. Although security at civilian airports has been
enormously improved, security at nuclear power plants is virtually
unchanged.
What would a catastrophe at a nuclear power plant in the United
States look like?
Let's consider the two large Indian Point reactors located in the
town of Buchanan in Westchester County, 35 miles from midtown
Manhattan. Both reactors are aging and adjacent to a very large
population base: More than 305,000 people live within a 10-mile
radius of the plants, and 17 million live within 50 miles.
An Indian Point meltdown caused by a small group of people intent on
wreaking disaster could readily be achieved. Terrorists could easily
disrupt the external electricity supply of the reactors, or obtain
one small speed boat, pack it with explosives, and drive it full
tilt into the two adjacent intake pipes that suck almost two million
gallons of Hudson River cooling water per minute into the reactors.
Within several hours the meltdowns would be in full swing.
Alternatively, a terrorist could drive a truck packed with
explosives into a strategic area of the plant, or, after a few basic
flying lessons, a novice pilot could commandeer a large passenger
plane loaded with fuel and fly it into the reactor itself,
destroying strategic safety systems and/or emptying the reactor of
its cooling water.
The calculations are truly frightening, because people in the
evacuation zone will receive enormously high doses of radiation. The
symptoms that will be experienced by people in Westchester County
and Manhattan include: acute loss of hair, severe nausea, vomiting
and diarrhea, bleeding from every orifice, and massive, overwhelming
infection. This collection of symptoms was first experienced by
Hiroshima victims and is called acute radiation sickness.
Now imagine this scene. Over 300,000 people are running and driving
away from the stricken reactor along winding Westchester roads,
stuck in traffic jams; all are in a state of panic, anxiety, and
acute disarray. Then they begin to taste a strange, metallic flavor
in their mouths. They infer that each breath exposes them to deadly
radioactive gases, the radio blasts out dire warnings, yet nobody
knows what they are doing and nobody is in control. And what about
Manhattan? Millions of people trapped as the bridges and tunnels are
totally blocked, hiding in their apartments, hardly daring to
breathe.
The economic consequences of a meltdown at Indian Point would be
stupendous. The financial capital of the world could be rendered
virtually uninhabitable, with a possible $1.17 trillion to $2.12
trillion dollars in damages.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not make public its risk
assessment studies on nuclear power plants, even though by law it is
obliged to do so. David Lochbaum says this "agency continues to make
regulatory decisions affecting the lives of millions of Americans in
a vacuum."
While the Indian Point nuclear power plants I and II operate at full
tilt -- in a country that insists on car seats and safety belts, no
smoking, no swimming without a lifeguard, fire extinguishers and
oxygen masks, life vests and air bags -- citizens lack the most
basic information about how best to protect themselves and their
children in the event of a nuclear meltdown. Nor is there any
official requirement to supply this information to the general
population.
(This piece originally appeared in Dr. Helen Caldicott's "Nuclear
Power Is Not the Answer," The New Press, 2006. Ths piece is
published here with the permission of The New Press. Helen Caldicott
is president of the Washington-based Nuclear Policy Research
Institute. She was a founder of the International Physicians for the
Prevention of Nuclear War, the organization that won the 1985 Nobel
Peace Prize.)
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are
written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of
important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect
those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an
open forum, original submissions are invited.)
© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
*****************************************************************
25 MiamiHerald.com: FPL idles St. Lucie reactor
04/02/2007 |
Bloomberg News
FPL Group, owner of Florida's biggest utility, said it idled the
St. Lucie 1 nuclear reactor for refueling and maintenance.
The unit should be back online in mid-May, Vicki Spencer, a plant
spokeswoman, said Monday in a telephone interview. The shutdown
began Sunday.
The Saint Lucie plant is located about 40 miles north of West
Palm Beach. Unit 1's capacity is about 839 megawatts, the company
has said. That means it can supply enough power for 671,200
average U.S. homes, based on Energy Department estimates.
Copyright | About the McClatchy Company
*****************************************************************
26 Journal News: Check the label on KI pills, it may be time for a new prescription
Monday, April 2, 2007
In the first wave of fear that followed the 9/11 attacks and made
some anxious residents of the Lower Hudson Valley look at the Indian
Point nuclear power plants in a new and uncomfortable light - as,
say, target-on-Hudson - safety officials in Westchester, Rockland
and Putnam counties eased public concern with a giveaway of
potassium iodide pills.
The pills, commonly known as KI pills, are said to protect against
thyroid cancer, one of the big health concerns of radiation
exposure, particularly in children.
But, like all medications, KI has a shelf life. And for those who
got the pills through the counties' distribution programs in 2002,
that expiration date is here.
Westchester officials announced earlier this month that they will
distribute new KI pills to schools, municipalities and others within
the 10-mile radius of Indian Point. Putnam officials plan a
give-away of fresh KI pills on Thursday, from 2-7 p.m. at the Carmel
Town Hall. Rockland officials, too, are planning to distribute
potassium iodide to towns and villages within the 10-mile radius,
and to the public at the fire training center in Pomona.
For those who live outside of the 10-mile radius of Indian Point and
got KI pills from their doctors, check the label. It may be time to
call for a new prescription, too. Though the fear sparked by 9/11
may have subsided, it's still worth remembering an essential lesson
of the attacks: Be prepared.
Copyright © 2006 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper
serving Westchester, Rockland and
Putnam Counties in New York.
*****************************************************************
27 The Spectrum: Give RECA to all states
www.thespectrum.com - The Spectrum, St. George, UT Customer Service:
Monday, April 2, 2007
Proposed legislation by Idaho Sens. Mike Crapo and Larry Craig
and Montana Sen. Conrad Burns to amend the Radiation Exposure
Compensation Act (RECA) to include both states failed in the last
Congressional session but did not die.
All three Senators are joining forces again to reintroduce the
bill with the support of other states that would compensate those
showing medical evidence they were harmed by nuclear testing
fallout in the 1950's and 1960's. The federal program enacted in
1990 has reimbursed Downwinders - the term used for victims of
nearly 1,000 atomic tests at the Nevada Test Site - with $50,000
to $150,000 stipends in 22 rural counties in Utah, Nevada and
Arizona.
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recommends that Congress
revise RECA to base compensation on medical history of applicants
and not just geographic designation. It also suggested narrowing the
focus because exposure to radioactive fallout was not a substantial
contributing cause of a number of cancers.
Residents of the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and
overseas U.S. territories who have been diagnosed with specific
RECA-compensable diseases and who may have been exposed, even in
utero, to radiation from U.S. nuclear-weapons testing fallout should
be compensated, the report said.
We concur with the NAS report, but how do you do that when the money
is not there? The RECA trust fund has had major shortfalls that
presidential discretionary funds of $72 million covered to make it
whole through 2005. The General Accounting Office estimated that the
funding levels appropriated to the RECA trust fund would be
insufficient to meet the projected claims and will require a further
$107 million through fiscal year 2011.
Unless Congress acts swiftly and sets policy, the money will not be
there for the RECA-designated areas let alone any expanded
geographic coverage. Crapo, Craig and Burns are right to seek
fairness from RECA for their states. Utah would do well to support
their efforts as should every state in the union to demand that the
same impartiality be applied because just like war veterans,
Downwinders sacrificed their health and lives so that America could
win the Cold War.
These victims are just as much national heroes to whom the country
owes justice as soldiers who made sacrifices on the battlefield. Of
course, we've seen how we treat our war heroes.
Originally published April 2, 2007
Copyright ©2007 The Spectrum. All rights reserved. Users of this
site agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy (Terms
updated 7/20/05)
*****************************************************************
28 Hawaii Reporter: HB 1452: The Depleted Uranium Scam
Monday, April 02, 2007
Special from Hawaii Free Press
By Andrew Walden, 4/1/2007 7:34:51 PM
Uranium is everywhere. The average person has over one microgram of
uranium for every two pounds of body weight, according to the
University of Michigan (UM) Health Physics Society. People daily eat
on average 1.9 micrograms of uranium in their food. The oceans are
so full of uranium that the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute
is experimenting with technologies to extract it from the Kuroshio
Current which is estimated to annually carry 5.2 million tons of
suspended uranium flowing past the east coast of Taiwan and Japan.
Unlike depleted uranium, the natural uranium in the food supply, the
oceans and in human bodies is not depleted of its’ radioactive
isotope, U-235.
Should people be concerned? Yes, but not because of eating fish
caught from our naturally-uranium-filled oceans. The real danger is
that this naturally occurring uranium is being used in Hawaii by
anti-Americans as a weapon against the United States armed forces.
House Bill 1452, now wending its way through the state Senate, is
the tool. It would require “the department of health to take soil
samples within 500 meters of Schofield Barracks to assess for
depleted uranium, at least once every 3 months, and annually report
to the legislature.â€
The problem? They are guaranteed to find uranium in the soil around
Schofield; it is everywhere in Hawaii--by nature. The result will be
used to falsely accuse the military of spreading uranium through the
environment. This false conclusion will in turn enlist the State of
Hawaii in the fake “DU†scare to disarm our troops of one of
their most effective armaments—depleted uranium ammunition—while
at war. Armed forces from as many as 35 countries have used DU
weapons, including Saddam’s Iraqi forces, Russia, China, Britain,
France, Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Kuwait and Taiwan.
DU is a life saver for American soldiers. Because it is 70% more
dense than lead, and when alloyed with tungsten tends to sharpen
rather than flatten on impact, a DU round will zip right through
enemy armor. It then ignites causing ammunition and fuel to explode
and burn, killing all the head-chopping Islamic fascists inside and
thus saving hundreds of humans. Equivalent lead ammunition would
just bounce off. DU’s effectiveness reduces the number of shots
needed to kill an enemy, thus reducing the risk posed by stray
bullets to civilians. DU is one of the reasons American deaths in
Iraq are 3,250 compared to 58,000 in Vietnam or 33,000 in Korea. Low
casualties are a major source of frustration for anti-Americans. As
Michael Moore explained April 14, 2004, "… the majority of
Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority
must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been
let….â€
Natural uranium contains on average 0.71% radioactive U-235 and
99.28% U-238. US Department of Defense processing of natural uranium
to extract the U-235 for nuclear power or nuclear weapons leaves
depleted uranium containing only 0.2% U-235 and 99.8% U-238. While
U-235 is the highly radioactive material found in atom bombs or
nuclear power plants, U-238 emits zero radiation. Far from being a
radiation danger, depleted uranium is actually used as a radiation
shield around nuclear reactors on Navy ships, submarines and in
civilian reactors.
According to Marvin H. Wilkening of the Department of Physics, New
Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, the soils of Hawai`i
naturally contain trace amounts of uranium which release just under
one atom of radon gas per square centimeter every two seconds. This
is why realtors are required to warn homebuyers of radon dangers.
The University of Michigan researchers estimate that nationwide an
average of 4840 pounds—more than two tons-- of uranium is present
in the top one foot of soil per square mile (also 26,400 lbs of
radioactive thorium). If Hawai`i soils are average, over 31 million
pounds of uranium (and 170 million pounds of thorium) are present in
the top foot of soil state wide —all entirely natural.
If the Hawaii Department of Health goes looking for DU near
Schofield, they will be examining soil samples naturally laden with
natural uranium in order to find any evidence of the less
radioactive depleted uranium. Will they be able to distinguish
between DU and natural uranium in trace amounts? To do so requires
very advanced technology. Illogically, any discovery of the less
dangerous, less radioactive DU, in the midst of the more radioactive
natural uranium will be hailed by the so-called-environmentalists as
an environmental disaster wrought by the military. HB 1452
eliminates any dispute, deciding in advance that: “depleted
uranium contamination would only occur because of military
operations.â€
How radioactive is depleted uranium? The International Atomic Energy
Administration points out, “DU is 3 million times less radioactive
than radium still found in many old luminous watches and 10 million
times less radioactive than what is used in fire detectors.â€
DU-oxide was being used as a yellow pigment for glass and ceramics
as recently as 1999. DU is also used in many commercial airliners as
a balancing weight on ailerons and in helicopter rotors. A Boeing
747 may have between 880 and 3300 lbs of depleted uranium used as a
tail balance. When activists fly to Honolulu, they bring a couple of
hundred pounds of so-called DU “contamination†with them in the
plane. Without tail balance the plane would likely crash, thus
forcing cancellation of their anti-DU protest.
In a typical example of anti-DU rhetoric, the “Moku Loa†chapter
of the Sierra Club claims: “The Super Ferry is Super Scary!
…will the 20-ton Stryker tanks be transported on HSF, complete
with depleted uranium ammunition? … They fire weapons containing
depleted uranium (DU), which is radioactive and potentially
health-threatening.†Superferry opponent Juan Williams writes in
the November 20, 2006 Haleakala Times, “We can’t afford to have
depleted uranium released and spread throughout Hawaii (on the
Superferry).â€
If DU is that dangerous, the logical response would be to shut down
the airline industry to protect the public from the massive amounts
of DU used in airplanes and helicopters. The sudden lack of
airplanes would be a strong argument for the Superferry, not against
it. But somehow Williams and the Sierra Club overlook this, possibly
because shutting down civilian airliners would not achieve the goal
of disarming America. Also, while an airline shutdown would achieve
the goal of stopping all development; such a demand would bring
about an economic depression, anger almost everyone in Hawaii, and
thereby clearly expose the false environmentalists for what they
are. Perhaps what is needed is for the legislature to attain the
same level of appreciation for the importance of national defense.
“Gulf War Syndrome†afflicts hundreds or even thousands of
veterans of the First Gulf War. Instead of searching for a cause and
a treatment, anti-American propagandists use Gulf War Syndrome as an
excuse to attack DU. They would have veterans believe that American
use of DU must be the cause of Gulf-War Syndrome, ignoring the
possibility that the disorders are caused by left over chemical
munitions and residuals from the Iran-Iraq war, by poisons released
in the hundreds of oil-well fires started under Saddam’s orders,
or by multiple causes. They also ignore Iraqi military use of
Soviet-supplied DU weapons.
The rhetoric on DU can get pretty hot. For instance Pauline Rigby,
writing on the Green Left Weekly website in 2004 claims, “Weapons
of mass destruction were never found in Iraq, yet the country is
today contaminated forever, because weapons of mass destruction have
been used against it. Thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste were
dumped on Iraq during Gulf Wars I and II and during the intervening
years when bombing continued through the use of depleted uranium
(DU) ammunition. The contamination of Iraq with DU has been
described as the equivalent of the unleashing of 13 Hiroshima-type
bombs on the country.â€
Rigby is lying on every point. Coalition forces discovered WMD in
Iraq totaling 500 chemical warheads. In addition US forces removed
what the BBC describes as “About 1.8 metric tons of ‘yellow
cake’ and 500 tons of unrefined uranium†from Tuwaitha, Iraq
where Saddam’s regime had stored it in hopes of re-starting
Iraq’s nuclear weapons program. When US forces arrived, they found
ignorant looters dumping Saddam’s uranium in order to salvage
55-gallon drums for sale to local villagers as water tanks. US
action has sharply reduced the amount of radioactivity released by
uranium in Iraq—exactly the opposite of the very common and
typical lies told by cheap anti-American propagandists.
In another example, Brita Mae Rose of “CounterPunch†writes,
“Depleted Uranium has a half life of 4.7 billion years--that means
thousands upon thousands of Iraqi children will suffer for tens of
thousands of years to come. This is what I call terrorism."
Wrong. Depleted uranium has a long half-life because it emits so
little radiation: Far less than many natural radiation sources. No
Iraqi children will be affected by DU radiation; they are infinitely
more at risk from radiation from the bright desert sun—and from
the fascist Islamist baby killers who are inspired by propagandists
such as Ms. Rose to believe they can defeat America by killing Iraqi
children in front of TV cameras.
Marti Townsend of the pseudo-environmentalist group “KEHEAâ€
writes in a March 29 letter to Senator Roz Baker (D-Maui),
“According to the International Atomic Energy Agency exposure to
DU – especially when inhaled – triggers mutation of genes is
linked to extreme and debilitating birth defects, nervous system
disorders, terminal kidney disease, and many types of cancer. The DU
at Schofield Barracks poses a threat to the majority of Oahu
residents.â€
Wrong. Here is what the IAEA really says: “The most detailed
ongoing study on the health effects of DU exposure is of 33 friendly
fire veterans of the Gulf War, most of whom have embedded DU
shrapnel in their bodies that cannot be removed. To date none has
developed any abnormalities due to uranium chemical toxicity or
radio toxicity, despite showing greatly increased levels of uranium
in their urine…. United Nation's Environment Programme (UNEP)
studies in 2001 (Kosovo), 2002 (Serbia and Montenegro) and 2003
(Bosnia and Herzegovina) - to which IAEA experts contributed - found
it was highly unlikely that a reported increase in the risk of
cancer in the Balkan regions could be associated with the residues
of DU munitions used there during the war in the mid-1990s. It found
the probability of significant exposure to local population was very
low.â€
When all the lies about DU radiation are exposed, the fallback
argument is that it is poisonous when ingested or inhaled. This is
true, but then so is lead. Lead toxicity is suspected by physicians
when blood lead levels reach 200 micrograms per liter. By the logic
of the anti-DU protesters, the US should also ban lead ammunition.
The result would be complete US disarmament leading to worldwide
warfare and a new dark age. Billions would perish. A better plan
would be: don’t eat lead, likewise don’t eat uranium.
As any scientist knows, a real study must have a “control†to
determine if uranium levels found near Schofield are unusual. The
logical choice would be to do a control study of the Hawaii State
Capitol Building and its inhabitants.
If legislators weigh on average 200 pounds each and are no more
radioactive than the average person, then it is likely that their
bodies contain together 7600 micrograms of non-depleted uranium. If
the average legislator weights 300 pounds it would be 11,400
micrograms of uranium. This does not include staffers, visitors or
lobbyists—some of whom may be even more radioactive than
legislators.
Many common building materials contain uranium. According to the
University of Michigan researchers, drywall contains on average 1000
parts per billion uranium as well as 3000 parts per billion thorium.
Clay brick contains on average, 8200 parts per billion uranium and
10800 parts per billion thorium. Cement has on average, 3400 parts
per billion uranium and 5100 parts per billion thorium.
If the Big Square Building comprises 100,000 square feet weighing
100 pounds per square foot, and that weight were made up of equal
parts drywall, brick, and cement, the ten-million-pound building
contains about 42 pounds of non-depleted uranium and 63 pounds of
radioactive thorium. Jim Albertini of the misnamed Malu-Aina Peace
Center writes March 27, “We must not tolerate having any depleted
uranium in our environment….†By this logic the legislature
should immediately be shut down and quarantined as a toxic waste
dump.
This could all work out quite well.
LINKS:
http://www.idust.net
http://www.idust.net/States/States.htm
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/DU/faq_depleted_uranium.shtml
http://www.umich.edu/~radinfo/introduction/natural.htm
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/bills/HB1452_SD1_.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3009082.stm
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-0
4-14
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en
http://www.wise-uranium.org/pdf/duusfaq.pdf
Andrew Walden is the publisher and editor of Hawaii Free Press, a
Big Island-based newspaper. He can be reached via email at
mailto:andrewwalden@email.com
HawaiiReporter.com reports the real news, and prints all editorials
submitted, even if they do not represent the viewpoint of the
editors, as long as they are written clearly. Send editorials to
mailto:Malia@HawaiiReporter.com
www.HawaiiReporter.com
*****************************************************************
29 [NukeNet] Legislators slam door to nuclear waste site
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:50:04 -0700
What the following means for San Luis Obispo County - Diablo now ships
it's "low-level" radioactive waste (if you want more info on the
difference between "high-level" and "low-level" waste just let me know
and I can send you info) to Barnwell. When Barnwell stops taking those
shipments Diablo Canyon will turn into not only a de facto High-Level
Radioactive Waste Dump but also a Low-Level Radioactive Waste Dump.
"Low-Level" waste is stored in 55-gal drums etc; much more vulnerable to
natural and man-made elements. Molly
After weeks of intense lobbying by conservation activists on one side
and Energy Solutions lobbyists on the other, the SC House Agricultural and
Environmental Affairs committee voted down legislation that would have kept
the Barnwell LLW site open to all states past its scheduled downsizing next
year. Earlier considered to be a close vote, when it came time for
Legislators to actually put their names to a vote, not a single Legislator
voted for the Bill, including it's author, Rep. Billy Witherspoon,
(R-Horry). He declined to vote at all, conceding the committee "had done
the right thing", his way of bailing out of some very bad legislation he
was primarily responsible for.
The vote essentially kills the bill and dashes all hopes Energy
Solutions might have for keeping the site open. This means that starting
next year, other states will have to come up with a way to deal with their
LLW, and the ditching (literally and figuratively) of their dismantled
dead nuclear reactor vessels. It will force a much needed national
discussion about nuclear waste.
Local activists and professional conservation group lobbyists worked
day and night for over a month, intensely researching the issues, talking
with legislators, writing articles and LsTE, calling supporters, turning
out at meetings, making oral presentations, and actually designing and
launching a new ( and still under construction) website,
www.DontWasteSC. com. Lobbyists from SC Conservation Voters and SC Sierra
Club- Anne Timberlake and Cary Chamblee- did an excellent job of lobbying,
monitoring, and reporting on the day to day status of the legislation,
coordinating with local grass roots organizers Leslie Minerd, Bob Guild,
Joe Whetstone, Pam Greenlaw, Gerry Rudolph, Ruth Thomas, Susan Corbett, SC
Sierra Club, the USC Student group SAGE, Carolina Peace Resource
activists, the LWV, Wildlife Federation, Conservation Voters of SC, Frank
Knapp's "You Need to Know" radio show on 1230AM in Columbia, and a whole
host of other local and statewide groups concerned about the nuclear waste
issue. In the end, it was the people's voices who were heard loud and clear
- SC wants to get out of the nuclear waste business and we are tired of
being dumped on!
While this was a much needed and important victory for SC, Energy
Solutions will certainly continue with their multi-pronged effort to
revitalize the sagging nuclear industry, including commercial reprocessing,
recycling of radioactive metals, and a whole host of other environmentally
polluting technologies . SC conservation groups will continue to be alert
to their attempts and to build alliances around the state and the region.
The defeat of this bill was a testament to what can be achieved when
different conservation organizations work together for a common goal.
Susan Corbett
Conservation Chair,
SC Sierra Club
http://www.thestate.com/426/story/21132.html
Legislators slam door to nuclear waste site
By SAMMY FRETWELL
A Utah company’s push to dump more nuclear waste in Barnwell County
suffered a crippling defeat Wednesday that some legislators called
historic in its message to the nation: South Carolina wants out of the
nuclear waste disposal business after three decades of owning a landfill
for the country’s radioactive garbage. Wednesday’s surprising 16-0 House
committee vote effectively kills legislation to keep the landfill open
to the country after 2008, although the landfill’s operator could try
other legislative means to accomplish its goal. Energy Solutions of
Utah, a rapidly expanding nuclear services company, could get help from
lawmakers who could attach an amendment to another bill. The company,
which has hired 10 lobbyists through its Barnwell division, is expected
to push similar legislation next year. But lawmakers who voted against
the landfill said the nation needs to find another place to bury
low-level nuclear waste. The overwhelming vote by the House Agriculture,
Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee underscores that
belief, some said. South Carolina has been taken for granted as a
disposal site by other states, said Rep. David Umphlett, R-Berkeley. The
bill allowed power plants across the nation to continue using the site
through 2023, instead of reserving the landfill for only South Carolina,
New Jersey and Connecticut after next year. “These other states in the
United States need to get up off of their backsides and start doing
what’s right,” said Umphlett, who initially supported keeping the site
open. “They want to stomp us in the ground and beat us up and say ‘You
bunch of country hicks.’ “I’m just getting tired of it.” The landfill is
used as a disposal site mostly by nuclear power plants for low-level
radioactive waste. Since 1971, it has taken about 28 million cubic feet
of waste. Its closure would mean plants in most states would have to
store some of their most potent nuclear waste on site. Past attempts in
the Legislature to shutter the site have failed after intense lobbying
by the landfill’s operator and utilities. Energy Solutions, which last
month took lawmakers on a bus tour of the landfill, issued a statement
saying the legislation helped the state and county economies. “We are of
course disappointed with today’s committee vote on what Energy
Solutions, the utilities, Barnwell County and others consider a sensible
and needed piece of legislation,” the statement said.Wednesday’s vote
shocked people familiar with the 18-member House agriculture committee.
The panel, which hears most environmental bills, in recent years has
been sympathetic to industries that sought law changes. But the
Conservation Voters of South Carolina, an umbrella group for
environmental organizations, intensely lobbied to close the dump to the
nation. For many legislators, the decision hinged on South Carolina’s
obligations. Under a 2000 law, the Palmetto State agreed to reserve
landfill space after 2008 for only New Jersey, Connecticut and South
Carolina companies that generate nuclear waste. Keeping the site open to
everyone after 2008 could take up much of that space and create legal
problems, many legislators said. “We’ve set the rules. The game is
over,’’ said Rep. Kenneth Hodges, D-Colleton. “The clock has expired.”
The landfill has little more than 1 million cubic feet of space left;
800,000 has been committed to New Jersey and Connecticut and much of the
rest to South Carolina. That’s particularly precious space if South
Carolina utilities add new nuclear power plants that would create more
waste, some lawmakers said. Rep. W.D. “Bill” Witherspoon, who sponsored
the bill, abstained from voting. Another member was absent. Witherspoon
, said the space question sank the bill.The dump opened as a disposal
site for lightly contaminated radioactive material, such as hospital
gloves and gowns. Today, it’s the only commercial landfill in the U.S.
that takes the most potent forms of low-level nuclear waste, such as old
reactor parts. If the landfill remains open to every state after 2008,
the state “could be home to some 30 dead decommissioned nuclear
reactors,’’ the Sierra Club’s Susan Corbett said of power plants that
will close. Barnwell County’s landfill has had two spills or leaks of
tritium, records show. Environmental groups say the site is a long-term
threat to Lowcountry drinking water. State officials say the site
doesn’t pose a health threat. Barnwell-area leaders were disappointed
and angry about Wednesday’s vote. The landfill contributes more than $2
million a year to the county for schools and government services — and
many local residents said they want the facility to remain open. “This
is an embarrassment,” Barnwell-area industrial recruiter Danny Black
heatedly told Witherspoon. Black said the landfill has been unfairly
characterized as a dump and Barnwell County must pay the price. The
county has had difficulty recruiting industry because of what he called
the negative image portrayed by the media and landfill opponents. “How
do you expect us to have industrial recruitment down there when we get
this kind of negative response from our elected leaders and people that
are supposed to be covering it in a not biased way?” Black told
Witherspoon. Witherspoon and Rep. Lonnie Hosey, a Barnwell Democrat who
is not a member of the committee, said South Carolina must now consider
how it will replace money lost from the landfill. Fees and other money
from the dump contribute about $12 million to the state and county. .
Environmentalists who worked to defeat the bill said the economic
argument is poor. South Carolina has ample revenue growth and can make
up for any lost money from the landfill, said Cary Chamblee, a lobbyist
for the S.C. Sierra Club and the S.C. Wildlife Federation. “It could be
made up very easily. It is a drop in the bucket.’’ Reach Fretwell at
(803) 771-8537. INSIDE BARNWELL Barnwell County’s low-level nuclear
waste dump will close to the nation as scheduled in 2008, a House
committee agreed Wednesday. WHY KEEP IT OPEN? Generates $12 million
annually for the state and Barnwell County through site revenues
WHY CLOSE IT?
Site has leaked tritium and has taken the nation’s low-level nuclear
waste for three decades
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"The lowest standards of ethics of which a right-thinking man can
possibly conceive is taught to the common soldier whose trade is to
shoot his fellow men. In youth he may have learned the command, 'Thou
shalt not kill,' but the ruler takes the boy just as he enters manhood
and teaches him that his highest duty is to shoot a bullet through his
neighbor's heart - and this, unmoved by passion or feeling or hatred,
and without the least regard to right or wrong, but simply because his
ruler gives the word." Clarence Darrow, Resist Not Evil
*****************************************************************
30 The Hindu: Australia ready to sell uranium to India
Tuesday, Apr 03, 2007
"Provided New Delhi adheres to strict safeguards"
MELBOURNE: Australian Prime Minister John Howard has expressed his
willingness to sell uranium to India provided New Delhi adhered to
strict safeguards, and said he would also back the India-U.S.
nuclear deal.
Australia's endorsement of the deal would come through its
membership of a key group of nuclear nations, the Nuclear Suppliers
Group, The Age newspaper said.
Mr. Howard opened the door to future uranium sales to India though
the present Australian policy does not permit it as India is not a
signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
While Mr. Howard emphasised that a formal decision to scrap the
policy had not been taken, he said he ``wouldn't rule out a change''
and spoke highly of Australia's relationship with India. ``We see
India as a very responsible country and our bilateral ties are
growing. There will be considerations that we will bear in mind,''
he was quoted as saying. Mr. Howard's comments came ahead of
closed-door talks in Canberra this week involving senior Ministers,
government officials and India's special nuclear envoy, Shyam Saran.
Mr. Saran was here to lobby for endorsement of the proposed deal
between New Delhi and Washington and to reinforce India's
long-standing interest in securing Australian uranium for its
nuclear power plants.
Ahead of the discussions, Mr. Howard made it clear that India would
need to submit its nuclear power plants to inspections by the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
Australia is strongly backing U.S. calls for India to open its power
plants to the inspections. ``There will only be a change [in
Australian policy] if we are completely satisfied that the
safeguards will be adequate,'' he said. ? PTI
Copyright © 2007, The Hindu.
*****************************************************************
31 DOE: DOE Extends Opportunity for Public Comment on the Scope of
the GNEP Environmental Impact Statement
April 2, 2007
WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced
it has extended the time to submit comments on the Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for President Bush’s Global
Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) from April 4, 2007 to June 4,
2007. DOE is extending the time for submittal of comments on the
proposed scope, alternatives, and environmental issues to be
analyzed in the GNEP PEIS. DOE will publish its notice in the
Federal Register on April 3, 2007.
“Continuing the environmental scoping process means we will continue
to better understand the environmental conditions under which we
will be operating,” DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy
Dennis Spurgeon said. “We have seen strong support for GNEP all
across the country and it’s encouraging to hear that an increasing
number of Americans recognize the growing need for nuclear energy, a
safe, affordable and emissions-free power source.”
The GNEP PEIS will analyze the potential domestic environmental
impacts for both programmatic and project-specific proposed actions,
as well as reasonable alternatives, and will also evaluate, at a
programmatic level, the potential environmental impacts associated
with the international initiatives.
GNEP would recycle spent nuclear fuel and destroy its long-lived
radioactive components. To accomplish this, GNEP proposes the
following three facilities:
1. A nuclear fuel recycling center, which would separate spent
nuclear fuel into reusable and waste components and then
manufacture new nuclear fast reactor fuel using the reusable
components.
2. An advanced recycling reactor, which would destroy long-lived
radioactive elements in the new fuel while generating electricity.
3. An advanced fuel cycle research facility, which would perform
research and development into spent nuclear fuel recycling
processes and other advanced nuclear fuel cycles.
GNEP also includes two international initiatives: 1) Ensure reliable
fuel services, in which the U.S would cooperate with countries that
have advanced nuclear programs to supply nuclear fuel services to
other countries that refrain from pursuing enrichment or recycling;
and 2) Deployment of proliferation-resistant nuclear power reactors
suitable for use in developing economies.
For a list of all sites under consideration for GNEP facilities, for
more information on GNEP or to review the full text of the GNEP PEIS
Notice of Intent, visit: http://www.gnep.energy.gov/.
Media contact(s):
Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940
DOE to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for
Proposed Surplus Plutonium Disposition at the Savannah River Site
DOE Seeking Input on Alternative Uses of Nickel Inventory
DOE to Send Proposed Yucca Mountain Legislation to Congress
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
32 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste to Meet in Rockville,
Maryland, April 10-12
News Release - 2007-07-042 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on
Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will meet April 10-12 in Rockville, Md., to
discuss, among other items, the status of the geological repository
program at Yucca Mountain. The committee will also discuss next
steps for rulemaking on groundwater protection at in-situ leach
sites.
The ACNW reports to and advises the Commission on all aspects of
nuclear waste management.
The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s Two
White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. The Tuesday
session will run from 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; the Wednesday session
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Thursday’s session will run
from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Anyone requiring the use of video teleconferencing to observe the
meeting should contact Theron Brown, at 301-415-8066 to ensure
availability. A complete agenda is available on the NRC’s Web
site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acnw/agenda/2007.
Individuals interested in making a statement or those seeking more
information contact Antonio Dias at 301-415-6805.
NRC news releases are available through a free list server
subscription at the following Web address:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC Home
Page at www.nrc.gov also offers a Subscribe to News link in the
News & Information menu. E-mail notifications are sent to
subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web Site.
Monday, April 02, 2007
*****************************************************************
33 RGJ.com: Blast in trench could affect casinos, hospitals, homes
SUSAN VOYLES RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
Posted: 4/1/2007
Nuclear waste on our rails
Nuclear waste on our rails Washoe Tribe youths pare down for
survival trek Tropicana gets major makeover for 50th birthday
Gondola malfunction strands Heavenly skiers Singer Rod Stewart a
little rusty, but still belts it out Top 10 stories from RGJ.com
Conviction reversed for sex offender
A mile-wide swath along the train tracks in Reno-Sparks would be the
most affected if a terrorist attack or an accident released
radiation from large casks containing nuclear waste that could be
shipped someday through the cities to Yucca Mountain.
"We know we have to be thoroughly prepared within a half-mile band
on either side of the tracks," said Bob Halstead, the state's
transportation consultant for Yucca Mountain. That would include
evacuation plans for the people in the exposure zone in Reno and
Sparks. The number of people who could be affected has not yet been
estimated.
"It never occurred to us DOE would look at routes closer to Reno,"
Halstead said.
A number of hotel-casinos in Reno and Sparks, two regional hospitals
and a state mental hospital are within a half-mile of the tracks.
For all the buildings in the corridor, he said the proper officials
would need to know where the air intake valves are so air systems
could be closed off, among many other details.
Reno and Sparks have passed a number of resolutions over the years
in opposition to Yucca Mountain, and they have approved resolutions
calling their cities "nuclear-free zones."
Local officials said another round of resolutions couldn't hurt.
"For DOE, we're not even on the radar screen. It's very
troublesome," said Washoe County manager Katy Singlaub.
She said Nevada's Congressional delegation is focused on killing the
entire project and not on transportation.
"The rail line continues to move forward," she said. "That makes it
easier for the whole project to happen."
State and local officials are urging DOE to provide maps of the
routes under consideration.
But so far, no routes have yet been chosen, said Allen Benson,
spokesman for DOE's Yucca Mountain repository project in Southern
Nevada.
Sparks Mayor Geno Martini said the thought of nuclear trains
stopping at the Sparks rail yard during a shift change for railroad
workers scares him to death. He said a number of train cars carrying
tanks of propane can be found at the yard, just south of John
Ascuaga's Nugget.
With a Union Pacific Railroad supervisor, he said he recently took a
tour of the yard. He said his friend was driving a borrowed car and
the two were never stopped once. "It's scary. It was an eye-opener
for me."
Martini said officials can only keep the pressure on DOE to hold a
meeting in Sparks to hear local residents' concerns. And he said
local officials also need to work closer with Nevada Sens. Harry
Reid and John Ensign.
Reno Mayor Bob Cashell said he is also concerned about a terrorist
attack or an accident involving a nuclear rail shipment through
town. When he owned the Boomtown truck stop in Verdi years ago, he
recalled a truck leaking napalm in his parking lot.
So far, Halstead said, the DOE has offered little in training and
preparing for an incident for cities along the rail corridor. He
said $10 to $30 million is to be split among 35 to 40 affected
states.
Aaron Kenneston, Washoe County emergency management director, said
the DOE should build a set of tracks to avoid the Reno-Sparks area
altogether.
But he said he's working to make sure all first responders are
trained to deal with radiation exposure. He said a team of first
responders was sent to Los Angeles this month to observe a training
exercise in a railroad trench there.
The county also has received a $500,000 Homeland Security grant to
start preparing evacuation plans for downtown, among other projects.
Bob Loux, Nevada Office of Nuclear projects director, said the state
will do more detailed studies on the impacts to the Reno-Sparks area
especially because DOE officials have not included the area in the
Mina railroad route study now under way.
Even without an incident, Halstead said, the risks associated with
nuclear rail shipments through town could harm tourism and property
values.
In a 2002 study, property value losses were estimated at $173
million if no accidents occurred because of the risk of an accident,
he said. The study said property values would drop by $445 million
if an accident occurred but no radiation was released and by $2.2
billion if radiation was released in a serious accident. But
Halstead said those numbers are out of date.
Halstead said radiation from casks carried on a passing train would
not be enough to harm anyone unless the train stopped at the same
place repeatedly. The exposure would be similar to getting an X-ray,
he said.
Each train would carry three large casks. "Even in a very severe
accident or a terrorist incident, you are not going to have any
immediate fatalities among the general public," Halstead said.
Firefighters and other first responders would likely be the most
exposed to any radiation leak and would face a 10-20 percent
increase in getting cancer over their lives, he said.
"It's not like an atomic bomb going off," he said. "The health
problem is if you don't clean it up right away and people are
exposed over days, weeks and months."
Halstead he expects DOE would send in teams immediately to evacuate
residents and begin a large-scale cleanup.
In a study done for Las Vegas, he said, the cleanup took from 400 to
500 days. Cleanup costs would be in the hundreds of millions or
billions of dollars.
© Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
34 RGJ.com: Nuclear waste on our rails
SUSAN VOYLES RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
Posted: 4/1/2007
Blast in trench could affect casinos, hospitals, homes
ANDY BARRON/RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
A train moves along the trench in downtown Reno on March 21, 2007.
Trains carrying up to 4,500 casks of high-level nuclear waste could
roll through downtown Reno and Sparks every week for 24 years under
the latest strategy by the U.S. Department of Energy to build a
railroad line to Yucca Mountain, according to Nevada officials.
In this new age of terrorism, the greatest threat is a cask being
blown up on a train in downtown Reno or Sparks, said Bob Loux,
Nevada Office of Nuclear Projects director.
"We think all shipments are vulnerable to terrorists and sabotage,"
Loux said.
Other than to keep pestering Energy Department officials, Loux said
he doesn't believe local and state officials can do much to stop the
latest route under study. "I don't see a legal recourse," Loux said.
As many as 4,500 or 5,000 casks -- half of all the casks to be
shipped by rail -- are expected to go through Reno and Sparks if the
Mina line is built and the DOE moves forward on using a "suite of
routes" instead of only one rail line across the country, said Bob
Halstead, the state's transportation consultant for Yucca Mountain.
Using the southern Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway route as
well as the central Union Pacific route would provide greater
security and operating flexibility in routing rail shipments from
the East Coast, he said. The Santa Fe route would come up from the
Central Valley in California and then over Donner Pass and into Reno
on the UP line. Other shipments would come across the UP line from
Utah.
At the earliest, DOE officials expect rail construction to begin in
2012. The repository would be open to start taking in 77,000 metric
tons of spent nuclear fuel in 2017 in the energy department's
best-case scenario, while state officials say 2025 is more likely,
if Yucca Mountain is approved at all.
Reno and Sparks are not included in a draft environmental-impact
study on the Mina railroad line now proposed to be built through
central Nevada. From the Union Pacific line, the Mina route would
start with an existing rail line at Hazen, east of Fernley. Then,
this route would head south to Hawthorne, where a new line would
follow an abandoned railroad route to the nuclear waste repository
at Yucca Mountain in Southern Nevada.
The study is limited to the effects of building the new line and
continued evaluation of the Caliente Route, which has been the
favored route, starting near the state's eastern border.
The suite of routes has been proposed in discussions by members of
the DOE's Transportation External Coordinating Working Group and
outlined in a series of DOE e-mails quoted in an unpublished report
by Halstead.
If only the Union Pacific route is used to send shipments across the
country, most allotments would not go through Reno. Only 1,000
casks, or about 10 percent, would come by train through Reno and
Sparks from power plants in California and Oregon, Halstead said.
Allen Benson, spokesman for DOE's Yucca Mountain repository project,
said he was unaware of the "suite of routes."
But he said there's no need to worry. DOE has been transporting
casks containing nuclear waste around the country for 50 years
without incident, including 5,000 shipments to a waste isolation
pilot plant in Carlsbad, N.M., he said.
"Nuclear material is already being shipped around this country and
has been since the dawn of the atomic age," Benson said. No harmful
release of radiation has occurred in this country in 2,700 shipments
over 1.6 million miles, the department boasts.
But Benson declined to say much about protecting the casks from
attack or sabotage.
"All of our shipments are escorted. I'm not going beyond that
because it's a security measure," he said. "Those who need to know
will be made aware."
Benson describes the casks as "pretty robust."
While DOE intends to hold another hearing in Reno when the draft
Mina report is issued this fall, Benson said there are no specific
plans to study the impacts of routing more nuclear waste by rail
through Reno and Sparks. That's because transportation already was
covered in an initial environmental-impact statement issued several
years ago, he said.
And, he said, Reno is no different than any other city, such as
Kansas City, that will be on the route.
Terrorist threat
With the same shoulder-fired weapons used in Iraq, Loux said
terrorists could launch a two-cycle rocket to destroy a cask
containing nuclear wastes on board a train.
"Most have a secondary explosion. The first explosion penetrates the
cask and then a second explosion occurs once inside. Then you'd have
a huge explosion that would include nuclear material," he said.
Depending on the winds, Loux said, the radiation could spread over
42 square miles.
He said his office had a list of weapons that could be used to
attack the casks on its Web site, but the FBI asked that information
be removed because it was copied onto terrorist Web sites. Loux said
the information was widely available through publications such as
Jane's military magazine.
In February Loux and Halstead stood along the trench through
downtown Reno and asked whether it would be a help or a hindrance in
safeguarding the trains. Trains run under 11 bridges in the
2-mile-long trench.
The trench will have to be studied more, Halstead said. When trains
carrying nuclear waste are coming, he said trains should be stopped
on the other set of tracks before entering the trench.
Halstead said the trench could have symbolic value for terrorists.
But if radiation leaked, he said, the trench could contain the
radiation. But a lot of wind could stoke a fire, making an incident
far worse.
In a letter, Reno Mayor Bob Cashell told DOE officials they
mishandled the environmental review process with the sudden change
of plans to send "large amounts of high-level radioactive waste and
spent fuel through the second largest metropolitan area in Nevada."
Sparks is concerned about train cars carrying nuclear material
"stopping and staging here when there's a change of crews," in a
letter signed by Mayor Geno Martini and the Sparks City Council that
was sent to the Energy Department.
Loux said he considers the Western states as a target because
terrorists could launch a missile almost anywhere because of the
wide-open spaces.
As more and more communities become aware that they too could become
targets if and when the trains come, Loux said a movement will grow
to stop the Yucca Mountain project despite DOE's desires "to keep
the discussion bottled up in Nevada."
Protection?
The spent nuclear fuel from power plants and other waste sources
represent only 10 percent of the cask's weight, Benson said. Over 24
years, he said, 1,250 rail shipments would be made, amounting to two
or three shipments a week.
Loux said his office initially petitioned the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission in 1999 to make the casks stronger. And since the Sept.
11 attacks, he said, the commission has started an internal analysis
of those standards to consider making them stronger.
Halstead said three casks would be shipped on a train. A large rail
cask would contain 21 pressurized nuclear fuel assemblies from power
plants, he said. The radioactive material inside those 21 bundles
weighs about 10½ tons, according to his figures.
Mina vs. Caliente
The new look at the Mina route was prompted by the Walker River
Paiute Tribe. Last June, the tribe notified DOE that it had
withdrawn its objection, filed in 1991, over an environmental study
to ship nuclear waste across its reservation through central Nevada.
The DOE estimates the Mina route would require only 240 miles of new
rail and would cross fewer mountain passes than the Caliente Route,
which would require 318 miles of new rail.
The Mina route is estimated to cost $1.6 billion versus $2 billion
for Caliente.
Both the Mina and the Caliente routes would involve few, if any,
rail shipments through Las Vegas. Clark County has loudly opposed
shipments and DOE officials would likely "pay a little more
attention to what they're saying," Loux said.
Earlier this month, the Energy Department asked for legislation to
withdraw public lands at Yucca Mountain and around it from public
use, a move required as part of its licensing. It also wants to lift
a 77,000-ton limit on the amount of nuclear waste to be stored there.
No matter the setbacks, the nuclear energy industry will wait,
Halstead said.
"I was just at a meeting with 2,200 (industry) people. Only 25 of us
were dubious about the future of the nuclear industry and dubious
about the future of Yucca Mountain," Halstead said.
Sooner or later, "from a common sense standpoint, these guys are
going to get a license," Halstead said.
Benson said the environmental study should be complete before the
energy department submits a license application to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission by June 2008 as planned.
He said the license could take three to four years to get.
Loux said the project will not be approved because of bad science,
questions over quality control work for the site selection and the
energy department's history at other sites. He said the department
has never built a nuclear-related facility that hasn't leaked.
Loux and Halstead said the Feather River Canyon route for Union
Pacific shipments from California -- an alternative suggested by
some local officials -- is unlikely to be adopted. The route would
avoid Reno but it's longer and more dangerous, susceptible to slides
of rock or mud.
Reader Comment Sun Apr 01, 2007 4:48 pm
I don't object to radioactive waste being moved by rail through
Reno-Sparks. I do object to the Yucca Mountain project because the
scientists are saying one thing ("very bad idea") and the engineers
another ("but everything was fine until you scientist went and
messed up our plans with real data..."). But I wouldn't be
particularly wound up about radioactive waste coming through
Reno-Sparks en route to California or to Utah. Lots of much scarier
stuff traverses our area via rail every day. I'm way more worried
about the contents of those "ordinary" tanker cars.
I also don't think the terrorist threat to radioactive waste being
moved by train is such a big deal, mostly because terrorists could
find softer, more attractive targets than Reno-Sparks. I won't go
into detail about "What I Would Do if I Was a Terrorist", but
suffice it to say that there could be a lot more mayhem and a lot
more mess without ANY radioactivity, and perhaps without any trains.
Besides, consider this: if there were a big explosion involving
radioactive waste on a train downtown, the cement casing to contain
it is already mostly built, thanks to the Reno Train Trench. It
would remain only to dump in a whole bunch of cement from above and
the sides to flood and encase the trench and seal the whole thing
off. See? The trench DOES have its benefits...
Reader Comment Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:20 am
rj345- It's good to see that there are more than just a few people
around that are tired of the same overblown reports on the nuclear
waste issue. I could not agree with you more. How about we take this
one step further. While I mostly agree with the many anti Yucca
Mountain bumper stickers that Nevada is not a wasteland, I would be
hestitant to include all of the state in that assesment. It is well
known that nuclear testing was done for quite some time in the south
central portion of the state. If I am not mistaken, that land is
essentially useless for a VERY long time. That, to me, is the reason
that storing the waste there makes perfect sense. We really need
some politicians who are not afraid to come out and say that maybe
we should take it... for a fee. Lord knows our tax structure needs
help, and since this course of action seems inevitable, why not get
some cash out of the deal?
Reader Comment Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:06 am
Isn't everything is a terrorist target? I personally am sick of
hearing about it and being told that I need to "be on alert". I have
much better odds of dying in a car accident than being hurt or
killed by a terrorist attack regardless of where I am in this
country and even overseas for that matter. I mean really people,
where do you think this nuclear waste is coming from. It is not
going to fall out of the sky, it already exists. It is, as we speak,
sitting in sites all over the country just as vulnerable to an
"attack" as it would be on a train. And since it is so spread out it
is even more vulnerable than if it were centrally stored. Do you
really believe the terrorists are just waiting for it to get on a
train passing through Reno so they can blow it up and make the
ultimate statement? If people don't want it traveling in their area
(which is all this is about) than at least be honest enough to say
so. By the way, not to rain on anyones parade, but if you knew what
already passes through this town on trucks and trains you might not
be as concerned about this. Don't hide behind the alledged terror
threat excuse. And for those of you who are obssesed over the
terrorists, it is time to open your curtain and let the sunshine in
again. Your life is passing you by and you are just a victim of this
administrations rhetoric.
© Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
35 Idaho Press-Tribune: Partnership aims to build nuclear energy complex near Bruneau
Posted: Monday, April 2, 2007 3:33 PM EDT
BRENEAU — Alternate Energy Holdings, Inc. and Idaho landowner and
businessman James Hilliard reached an agreement today that could
lead to a 1,600 megawatt energy complex in Owyhee County, according
to an Alternate Energy Holdings press release.
Hilliard owns 4,000 acres near Bruneau, and a portion of this
property will be the site of Idaho Energy Complex, Idaho's first
commercial nuclear/biofuels plant. Heat generated as a byproduct of
the reactor will be used to produce ethanol and methane made from
local agricultural sources.
The Idaho Energy Complex could create enough power for about 1.5
million homes — or three times the number of homes in Idaho.
Alternate Energy Holdings president and CEO Don Gillilspie said
spent reactor fuel could be stored on-site for 25 years. It will
then be sent to a reprocessing station. The high-level waste will be
converted to more fuel, while the low-level waste will continue to
be kept in repositories around the country.
Copyright © 2007 Idaho Press-Tribune. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
36 Sofia Echo: FOREIGN INVESTORS INTERESTED IN URANIUM PRODUCTION IN BULGARIA -
09:03 Mon 02 Apr 2007
Foreign investors from Canada, Austria, Russia and Ukraine are
interested and ready to work on uranium extraction in Bulgaria,
executive secretary of Bulgarian Chamber of Mining and Geology Petar
Petrov said.
Bulgaria has nearly 20 000 tons of explored uranium deposits and its
geological potential is much higher, Petrov said.
Uranium extraction in Bulgaria was stopped in 1992 and the uranium
mines have already disappeared, Focus news agency reported.
Foreign investors would face several problems concerning uranium
extraction in Bulgaria, Petrov said.
Some measures need to be taken so that the work on deposit
exploration can begin. Those measures include abolishing the
government’s decision for liquidation of uranium production and
taking into consideration new European requirements related to
environmental network Natura 2000.
Among the huge problems the investors will face are the negative
attitude within society concerning uranium production and the
position of eco organisations on this issue, Petrov said.
Comments by dianne hatton - 10:44 02 Apr 2007
This is just lovely. There are 35 old Uranium mnes in Bulgaria,
four within 20 kilometers of Sofia and twenty eight within the
same distance of Bansko, Pamporovo, Borovets and Burgas. So now
we have managed to grow the tourist industry, ruined the
landscape with uncontrolled developments, we can irradiate our
visitors as well. According to world experts it is not safe to
live within 50 miles of a mine or dump, all these tourist
locations are well within this distance. Never mind, at least the
government get some much needed money, especially for the
hospitals whch will deal with the long term problems.
Web www.sofiaecho.com
© 2001-2007, Sofia Echo Media Ltd. Web development and design by
*****************************************************************
37 Tonawanda News: Federal push may be needed to clean up landfill
TOWN OF TONAWANDA:
Published: April 02, 2007 10:47 am
By Dan Miner/minerd@gnnewspaper.com
The Tonawanda News
“If residents of Tonawanda want the (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
to do more than what Congress has authorized us to do, they will
have to address those concerns to their elected officials,” Army
Corps Public Affairs Officer Bruce Sanders said. “It’s as simple as
that.”
Sanders was discussing radioactive materials — uranium, radium and
thorium — which have been found in the Town of Tonawanda landfill.
The Army Corps, testing those materials as part of its FUSRAP
program, has found risk levels to be within acceptable U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency guidelines. In other words, they’re
legally healthy, and there’s nothing the Army Corps can do but leave
them there.
That’s reflected in the Corps’s 2006 report, which says the
materials should not be removed. It’s also part of its March 26
proposed plan, which recommends materials be left in the landfill,
whether it’s capped or not.
And despite the outcry of concern among City of Tonawanda residents
who live near the site, it will be the Army Corps final decision.
Unless, that is, something happens which changes the Corps legal
right to act on those materials. That something appears to be
pressure and action from federal lawmakers.
Uncertainty
“If the level of concern is great enough, there’s always potential
that Congress could take some action to modify our authorization in
the program,” said Project Manager Stephen Buechi of the 90-day
public comment period which began March 26. “Congress authorizes the
program and makes the rules and regulations for FUSRAP.”
But the specific action needed to be taken by those lawmakers,
specifically Sens. Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer and
Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, D-Fairport, is unclear. Sanders
pointing out that the Army Corps does not advocate, said he didn’t
know. Neither do the state or Niagara Falls EPA offices, since they
are merely consultants to the Army Corps in FUSRAP programs.
The feds
If the lawmakers and their offices have big plans, nothing but small
glimpses are available to the public eye.
Schumer and Slaughter have been the most actively publicly.
“This issue is of the utmost importance to the residents and
businesses of (Tonawanda) and the entire region,” Schumer said
Friday in a statement via e-mail. “I will hold the Army Corps’ feet
to the fire to ensure this issue receives the attention and action
it needs and deserves.”
Schumer also released a statement on Feb. 23 urging the Army Corps
to move fast and calling the landfill “a very serious problem.”
Slaughter, who is currently touring the Middle East with House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has sent a March 5 letter to the Corps in
which she asked for more testing.
“This is definitely on her radar,” said Slaughter Spokesman Frank
Benenati. “It’s something we’re very much aware of.”
A Clinton aide said action is planned within the next week, but
declined to say what it is.
Thus far, letters and public statements have done little to change
the Army Corps’ actions. The body did extend the public comment
period on the proposed plan from 30 to 90 days, and they say they’ll
look at all comments to see if there’s anything important. But
requests from Schumer and Slaughter for more testing did not make it
into the proposed plan.
The locals
Meanwhile, the more local the politicians get, the greater the
outcry.
City of Tonawanda Mayor Ron Pilozzi, Councilman Rick Davis and Erie
County Legislator Michele Iannello, D-Kenmore, have all been active
in pushing for testing of residents’ properties near the landfill,
removal of the radioactive materials and in trying to get Schumer,
Clinton and Slaughter involved.
Davis recently sent a letter to the Army Corps Friday detailing his
issues with the proposed plan, breaking it down section by section
and, ultimately, asserting that the only acceptable outcome is
removal of the materials.
He acknowledged that federal lawmakers can change the Army Corps
action, but like almost everyone else, was fuzzy on the details.
“The only thing we can do is ask the public to write letters to
Schumer, Clinton and Slaughter and plead with them for the Army
Corps to fully remediate the landfill,” he said. “Digging it up and
getting it out of there is the only answer.”
Pilozzi has advocated since at least June 2006 for further testing
on residents properties, and has written a number of letters to all
involved parties.
Iannello was critical of the report as well.
“I’m not thrilled by it,” she said. “We would still like to have an
evaluation of those numbers regarding daily use, so I’m not
completely satisfied.”
Iannello pointed out concern for another radioactive material in the
landfill out of the Army Corps’ purview, americium left from defunct
smoke detector company EAD Metallurgical, and expressed her support
for a proposed road between residents properties and the landfill.
The road has been supported by Pilozzi and objected by Davis.
State involvement
State Sen. Antoine Thompson also expressed his disagreement with the
proposed plan, and said he’ll be active in advocating a cleanup in
the coming months.
“All the residents know is that it’s in their backyard,” said
Thompson, whose district encompasses surrounding City of Tonawanda
properties but not the landfill itself. “I’m all for making
brownfields into greenfields.”
Thompson has a conference call today, along with state Assemblyman
Robin Schimminger and state Sen. Mary Lou Rath, in which they Army
Corps will explain their proposed plan.
Meanwhile, the 90-day public comment period is dwindling, and once
it’s over, so too may be the hopes of residents who want the Army
Corps to remove radioactive materials. The Army Corps will hold one
more meeting, set for 7 p.m. on April 25, at the Tonawanda High
School auditorium, to collect oral public comments.
Capping the landfill
Recently, the state Department of Environmental Conservation said it
may move the radioactive materials further into the landfill and
away from nearby residences fill, though that stance has been
unpopular with local officials who say they want it removed
completely.
The DEC is working with the Town of Tonawanda, which owns the site,
to close the landfill for good, though both entities are waiting for
the Army Corps’ proposed plan.
Contact info
The City of Tonawanda Web site, http://www.ci.tonawanda.ny.us/, has
made a packet of information on the landfill available. There are
also form letters available on the site to Schumer, Clinton and
Slaughter.
Contact reporter Dan Miner at 693-1000, Ext. 115.
LANDFILL: Pictured is the Town of Tonawanda landfill in May 2006,
before the latest round of citizen concern arose in an attempt
remove radioactive materials in the landfill. File photo/The
Tonawanda News (Click for larger image)
See our Bulletin Board
© 2007, Tonawanda News 435 River Road; North Tonawanda, NY 14120
Phone: (716) 693-1000 Fax: (716) 693-0124 Email news tips and
comments
Greater Niagara Newspapers: Amherst, NY | Lockport, NY | Medina, NY
| N. Tonawanda, NY | Niagara Falls, NY | Grand Island, NY
Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. ? CNHI Classified
Advertising Network ? CNHI News Service Associated Press content
© 2007. All rights reserved. AP content may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Our site is powered by
Zope and our Internet Yellow Pages site is powered by
PremierGuide. Some parts of our site may require you to download
the Flash Player Plugin.
*****************************************************************
38 AU ABC: Howard tours SA uranium mine
AM - Monday, 2 April , 2007 08:00:00
Reporter: Peta Donald
TONY EASTLEY: The Prime Minister John Howard is heading to South
Australia's far north today to tour the country's biggest uranium
mine.
He'll hold talks with BHP Billiton about its plans to more than
double production from Olympic Dam.
It will also give him a chance no doubt to talk up the divisions
within the Labor Party over whether there should be more uranium
mines and a local nuclear power generating industry.
From Canberra, Peta Donald reports.
PETA DONALD: The Prime Minister will fly to Adelaide, and then more
than 500 kilometres into the desert. There lies the largest known
uranium deposit in the world, at the giant Olympic Dam mine.
He'll talk with Chip Goodyear, the Chief Executive of BHP Billiton
about plans for a $6 billion expansion, as the Industry Minister Ian
Macfarlane explains.
IAN MACFARLANE: The Prime Minister is there to listen to ... to find
out the facts out uranium mining and the potential it has to expand
jobs in Australia and also grow our exports. But most importantly,
lower the greenhouse emissions from the generation of electricity
from nuclear power.
PETA DONALD: With the Opposition gaining momentum in the global
warming debate, with its climate change summit over the weekend, the
government is keen to swing the discussion back to uranium mining
and nuclear power.
It wants to make the most of differences within Labor over moves to
change its policy on uranium mining, to a policy that would allow
new mines to open up, even though it's irrelevant to Olympic Dam,
because it's an existing mine.
Labor's resources spokesman, Chris Evans.
CHRIS EVANS: Olympic Dam, it will be the largest uranium mine in the
world. Whatever happens in terms of ALP policy debate, it will go
ahead and continue to grow under Labor's current policy.
PETA DONALD: Senator Evans believes the policy on no new uranium
mines will be scrapped at the ALP's national conference later this
month. The government argues if Labor supports expanding uranium
mining, it should be prepared to consider allowing nuclear generated
power for Australia.
Ian Macfarlane;
IAN MACFARLANE: Kevin Rudd is being quite hypocritical about uranium
mining and the expansion of uranium mining in Australia. He's saying
that it's good to expand uranium mining in Australia, he's saying
it's good to export that uranium to our friends overseas like the
United States, the UK, Japan, China and other countries.
But at the same time, he will not allow a debate in Australia about
using that uranium here to lower our own greenhouse gas emissions.
PETA DONALD: Labor's Chris Evans argues, that unlike other
countries, Australia doesn't need to go down the nuclear path.
CHRIS EVANS: The situation in Australia is we get to choose. We've
got great coal reserves, great gas reserves and tremendous potential
for geothermal, solar and wind. We just don't need to do the nuclear
thing.
PETA DONALD: The nuclear thing is also an option dismissed in a
discussion paper being released today by Mark Diesendorf from the
University of New South Wales.
Dr Diesendorf says those who believe baseload electricity can't be
produced by renewable energy are wrong.
MARK DIESENDORF: In the long run, Australia's electricity needs
could be totally met from a renewable energy.
PETA DONALD: Would that be economic?
MARK DIESENDORF: If Australia decides that it must reduce its
greenhouse gas emissions substantially, then renewable energy
coupled with energy efficiency is going to be cheaper than any other
alternative. It will be cheaper than so called clean coal, and it
will be cheaper than nuclear power.
PETA DONALD: The minister, Ian Macfarlane isn't convinced.
IAN MACFARLANE: Geothermal aside, it's difficult to see how wind or
solar could provide electricity 24-hours a day, seven days a week
unless they can develop some very new technology in terms of storing
that energy for the days when the sun doesn't shine or the wind
doesn't blow.
TONY EASTLEY: Federal Industry Minister Ian McFarlane. That report
from Peta Donald.
*****************************************************************
39 ABC: Uranium prices soar -
02/04/2007
The price of uranium is soaring as the debate over new mines
intensifies.
Prime Minister John Howard is in South Australia's far north today,
touring the country's biggest uranium mine.
He is holding talks with BHP Billiton about its plans to more than
double production from Olympic Dam.
The world uranium price is soon expected to break through $US100 a
pound - more than twice the level it was a year ago.
Investment adviser Mark Nuitta expects the price to go even higher.
"The bottom line is that China is still building a lot of nuclear
plants for energy," he said.
"We're seeing a lot of talk around the world about greenhouse
emissions [and] the biggest culprit there is coal.
"As a result, I think with 21-odd nuclear power plants coming on
stream in China, you're not going to see the uranium price drop
short-term."
* ABC Online Home Page
*****************************************************************
40 AU ABC: Group accused of running anti-uranium scare campaign.
03/04/2007.
ABC News Online
The Veterans Affairs Minister says he is concerned a group opposed
to the use of depleted uranium weapons is using Gulf War veterans to
run an anti-uranium scare campaign.
The group says overseas tests confirm two Sunshine Coast Gulf War I
veterans - one in the Army and the other in the Navy - were exposed
to the heavy metal during their service 15 years ago.
Veterans Affairs Minister Bruce Billson says the Depleted Uranium
Silent Killer organisation is running an anti-uranium scare campaign.
The organisation's spokeswoman, Pauline Rigby, says the group is
simply concerned with the health of veterans.
"It's a worthy agenda to be taking seriously the health effects of
radioactive warfare on our Australian service personnel," she said.
She says the test results will be published in two international
journals.
*****************************************************************
41 NewsBlaze: Department of Energy Extends Opportunity for Public Comment
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced it has extended
the time to submit comments on the Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (PEIS) for President Bush's Global Nuclear Energy
Partnership (GNEP) from April 4, 2007 to June 4, 2007. DOE is
extending the time for submittal of comments on the proposed scope,
alternatives, and environmental issues to be analyzed in the GNEP
PEIS. DOE will publish its notice in the Federal Register on April
3, 2007.
"Continuing the environmental scoping process means we will continue
to better understand the environmental conditions under which we
will be operating," DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy
Dennis Spurgeon said. "We have seen strong support for GNEP all
across the country and it's encouraging to hear that an increasing
number of Americans recognize the growing need for nuclear energy, a
safe, affordable and emissions-free power source."
The GNEP PEIS will analyze the potential domestic environmental
impacts for both programmatic and project-specific proposed actions,
as well as reasonable alternatives, and will also evaluate, at a
programmatic level, the potential environmental impacts associated
with the international initiatives.
GNEP would recycle spent nuclear fuel and destroy its long-lived
radioactive components. To accomplish this, GNEP proposes the
following three facilities:
1) A nuclear fuel recycling center, which would separate spent
nuclear fuel into reusable and waste components and then manufacture
new nuclear fast reactor fuel using the reusable components.
2) An advanced recycling reactor, which would destroy long-lived
radioactive elements in the new fuel while generating electricity.
3) An advanced fuel cycle research facility, which would perform
research and development into spent nuclear fuel recycling processes
and other advanced nuclear fuel cycles.
GNEP also includes two international initiatives: 1) Ensure reliable
fuel services, in which the U.S would cooperate with countries that
have advanced nuclear programs to supply nuclear fuel services to
other countries that refrain from pursuing enrichment or recycling;
and 2) Deployment of proliferation-resistant nuclear power reactors
suitable for use in developing economies.
For a list of all sites under consideration for GNEP facilities, for
more information on GNEP or to review the full text of the GNEP PEIS
Notice of Intent, visit: www.gnep.energy.gov.
Source: U.S. Department of Energy
judythpiazza@gmail.com
Copyright © 2007, NewsBlaze, Daily News
Copyright © 2004-2007 NewsBlaze LLC
*****************************************************************
42 Reuters: Africa moves to recapture top uranium ranking
Mon 2 Apr 2007, 9:48 GMT
By Eric Onstad
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Mining companies are flocking to uranium
projects in Africa, giving the continent a chance to recapture its
top production ranking as simple geology and easier regulations
allow a quicker ramp-up than other regions.
The continent was the world's top producer of uranium in 1980, with
South Africa, Namibia and Niger together accounting for a third of
output in the West.
Production slipped during a long period of weak prices, but a
10-fold surge in prices in the last five years has renewed interest
in African uranium deposits.
"Looking at prospective mines around the world that are going to
come into production over the next two years, there's quite a few in
Africa, so (output is) definitely moving quite strongly upwards
now," said Steve Kidd, director of strategy and research at the
World Nuclear Association in London.
"In Africa, it doesn't take quite so long to go through the
regulatory process."
Besides faster government approvals, most deposits on the continent
are shallow, also speeding up the timeline between discovery and
production.
In Canada, the world's top producer, uranium mines are at least 800
metres below the surface, said Robert Wallace, chief executive of
Yellowcake Plc, which invests in uranium firms. Australia is the
second ranking producer.
"The sandstone deposits typical of Africa are very easy to mine.
That's an advantage for Africa, we don't have the depth
complications of the rest of the world," he told last week's IQPC
Uranium Africa 2007 conference in Johannesburg.
AFRICA WELCOMES URANIUM MINES
Boosting the attraction of the continent is a welcoming attitude by
many countries for new uranium mines, so government processes do not
cause big delays.
"It's seen as a good source of jobs and the government and local
people seem very supportive of it," Kidd said.
"In Australia and Canada in particular, even though they've got very
good reserves of uranium, it's taking a long time to get new mines
up and running."
The new Lager Heinrich uranium mine in Namibia, which last month
launched its first shipments, was in production in around four years
while Canada's new Cigar Lake mine was discovered over 20 years ago,
Kidd added.
Cigar Lake has had other problems besides regulations, such as
flooding, but companies generally reckon on 15-20 years to get a new
uranium mine in Canada into production, he said.
SPANNING CONTINENT
The continent has potential for nearly tripling its output by 2011
as some existing mines expand and a raft of new projects go into
production. (For Factbox with details, please double-click on
Africa's 2006 output of 17.5 million lbs of uranium oxide would more
than double by 2011 from the projects of just one company, UraMin
Inc., which is seeking to become the world's fourth biggest uranium
producer with production of 18 million lbs.
UraMin, listed in Canada and London, has advanced projects in South
Africa, Namibia and Central African Republic.
That is typical of the expansion trend with firms targeting
traditional producers South Africa and Namibia as well focusing on
breaking ground in new countries.
Australia's Paladin Resources, which developed the Langer Heinrich
mine in Namibia, is planning to commission its Kayelekera mine in
Malawi in September 2008.
In South Africa, where uranium has traditionally been produced as a
byproduct, gold companies are taking a second look at resources that
were ignored or closed during the slump in prices that rendered many
operations unprofitable.
South Africa's biggest uranium producer AngloGold Ashanti has said
it plans to expand production and Harmony Gold wants to exploit a
dump of mine tailings that contains high levels of uranium.
Harmony Chief Executive Bernard Swanepoel told Reuters he has had
conversations with Russian investment firm Renova Group about a
possible sale of Harmony's uranium assets.
First Uranium, a unit of South Africa's Simmer & Jack Mines, is also
planning to reprocess waste from gold mining and extract uranium.
It is planning to start uranium production next year from its
Buffelsfontein tailings project, which has 42.7 million lbs of
measured and indicated uranium resources.
A good example of Africa's uranium renaissance is sxr Uranium One,
which emerged from the dormant South African gold company Aflease
Gold and reinvented itself as a uranium firm.
The company, which launched production last month at its Dominion
Reefs mine in South Africa, has embarked on a string of takeovers,
culminating with a deal in February to merge with UrAsia Energy Ltd
to form a global group with a market capitalisation of about $5
billion.
South Africa wants to become the centre of activity on the
continent, developing not only mining, but a nuclear power industry
and uranium enrichment sector too.
"The market is there, the fundamentals are there, we have the
infrastructure so there's no reason that southern African shouldn't
be a major player again in the future," Charles Storer, chief
executive of uranium sales and trading firm NUFCOR, told last week's
uranium conference.
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved. | Learn more about Reuters
*****************************************************************
43 reviewjournal.com: Anti-nuclear rally held at test site
Apr. 02, 2007
Martin Sheen among activists cited by police
1||1687023.jpg||A sign warns drivers about protesters on the roadway
near the entrance to the Nevada Test Site near Mercury on Sunday.
||Photo by John Locher. 1||1685621.jpg||Bud Deraps, a World War II
veteran, walks with a Veterans for Peace flag along U.S. Highway 95
south of the entrance to the Nevada Test Site on Saturday. ||Photo
by John Locher.
MERCURY -- Martin Sheen was among a group of peace activists cited
during an anti-nuclear protest Sunday at the Nevada Test Site,
authorities said.
Dozens of people took part in the rally sponsored by the Nevada
Desert Experience outside the test site, 70 miles northwest of Las
Vegas.
Organizers estimated the crowd size at 150, but Nye County Sheriff
Tony DeMeo put the figure at about 75.
"We are asking for nuclear disarmament and peace," organizer Ming
Lai said. "We are asking for the Nevada Test Site to stop doing the
testing they're doing. The only reason they're doing it is to make
bombs."
Sheen was among 39 protesters released after being cited by
sheriff's deputies for crossing onto test site property after the
rally, test site spokesman Darwin Morgan said.
Calls to Sheen's publicist and agent Sunday were not immediately
returned.
Sheen, who spent seven seasons playing President Josiah Bartlet on
the TV drama series "The West Wing," has received similar citations
at the test site in the past.
Also cited was retired Army Col. Ann Wright, who resigned as a
senior diplomat at the U.S. Embassy in Mongolia in 2003 to protest
the Iraq war.
Citations also were issued to Shoshone Nation leader Carrie Dann of
Nevada and the Rev. Louis Vitale, a Roman Catholic priest from the
San Francisco Bay Area.
The protest, which featured speeches and folk music, capped a
weeklong march to the site from Las Vegas by demonstrators.
DeMeo said many protesters, including Sheen, complimented sheriff's
deputies for their handling of the citations, he said.
"They're very respectful to us, and we're that way to them," the
sheriff said. "They get their point across, get the citations, and
then they're on their way."
The sprawling test site is where the federal government conducted
above- and below-ground nuclear detonations from 1951 to 1992. It
remains the site of non-nuclear government tests on radioactive
materials.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 -
*****************************************************************
44 SF New Mexican: Los Alamos scientist: X-ray machine right on schedule
Mon Apr 2, 2007 6:54 pm
The Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrotest facility, better known as
DARHT, was completed in 2003, but scientists discovered part of the
machine did not work.
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
LOS ALAMOS, N.M. (AP) _ A Los Alamos National Laboratory scientist
leading a team in rebuilding an X-ray machine aimed at checking the
reliability of nuclear weapons says it should be operational before
its first full-fledged test next year.
The Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrotest facility, better known as
DAHRT, was completed in 2003, but scientists discovered part of the
machine did not work.
The machine, which had not been tested at full power, failed under
the tremendous voltages required to generate an X-ray pulse powerful
enough to make a four-frame movie of the dense metal at the heart of
an exploding mock nuclear bomb.
Ray Scarpetti said he and his team have rebuilt the parts that
failed and tested them to the breaking point. An independent review
commissioned by the federal government recently concluded that there
is ''high confidence'' the fix will work.
The machine cost more than $300 million to build. Another $90
million has gone into fixing the problems that have prevented it
from fully working.
The machine is being rebuilt in the accelerator hall of the lab's
DAHRT building. At the back end of the hall, a device fires a burst
of electrons. They pass down the middle of a row of giant
doughnut-shaped, high-voltage cells that accelerate the electrons to
close to the speed of light.
It is those 17,000-pound cells that failed the first time around.
Scarpetti's crew has lined up 26 of the new cells and fired an
electron beam down the middle to test them. The crew also pushed
them to 15 percent more voltage than they were designed for, to make
sure the failure that doomed their performance in 2003 has been
fixed, Scarpetti said.
The rest of the 74 doughnut-shaped cells should be installed by this
summer, giving Scarpetti and his team time to adjust the X-ray
machine's performance before it's tested next year.
''It's really just a matter of tweaking,'' he said. ''We know it's
going to work.''
©2007, Santa Fe New Mexican, all
*****************************************************************
45 SF New Mexican: Watchdog group says biosafety lab work jumps gun
Mon Apr 2, 2007 6:54 pm
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
LOS ALAMOS, N.M. (AP) - A watchdog group says Los Alamos National
Laboratory is jumping the gun by doing work on a biosafety lab built
in 2003 but never put into use.
The lab contends that it is simply trying to do preliminary work in
an empty building.
Bernie Pleau, spokesman for the National Nuclear Security
Administration's Los Alamos Area Office, said the laboratory
submitted a request in March to use the facility for interim
activities allowed under the National Environmental Policy Act. That
request must be approved by NNSA headquarters.
Nuclear Watch New Mexico contends the lab is trying to get around
environmental policy requirements.
"LANL is trying to circumvent federal law by beginning operation at
the biolab now," Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch
New Mexico, said in a news release.
Attorney Alletta Belen, representing the environmental group, wrote
NNSA officials last Wednesday, opposing the lab's request on the
Biosafety Level 3 facility. The 3,200-square-foot building has not
been used because of legal challenges, court opinions and decisions
by the U.S. Department of Energy.
The biosafety lab would study pathogens like those that cause
anthrax and plague. Its biosafety level 3 classification, or BSL-3,
is under environmental review.
A draft environmental statement has been delayed but is expected in
a few months, Pleau said.
Belen's letter cautioned federal officials against any attempt to
begin "interim operations" in the building before the environmental
impact statement is final.
Lab spokesman Kevin Roark said Nuclear Watch New Mexico's position
was a "gross misrepresentation of the intent of this request."
"What we've got is a finished facility that's sitting cold and dark
and that we would like to utilize, but not as a BSL-3," he said.
Los Alamos' biology division now operates at the BSL-2 level _
activities considered as moderate potential risk to the public or
the environment. If BSL-3 is authorized, two rooms in the building
would do biological research at that level.
A BSL-3 rating means the lab could grow live organisms. The current
BSL-2 rating allows researchers to work with deadened organisms such
as those given in medical vaccinations.
The laboratory, long involved in biological research, maintains
databases for HIV and flu viruses and has done computer modeling of
avian flu pandemics for national preparedness.
In recent years, it has specialized in biological forensics,
tracking pathogens to their sources.
NNSA has cited increasing demand for research and development
activities involving biological weapons. It said the Department of
Homeland Security and other intelligence and security agencies have
expressed interest in working with Los Alamos.
However, critics contend the research's "dual use" capability _ for
offensive as well as defensive purposes _ is inappropriate. Their
legal efforts have delayed the program and influenced the DOE's
decision to do an environmental impact statement.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use | ©2007, Santa Fe New Mexican, all
*****************************************************************
46 Hanford News: HAMMER gets not to become regional center
This story was published Saturday, March 31st, 2007
Les Blumenthal, Herald Washinton, D.C. Bureau
WASHINGTON - An agreement signed Friday by the departments of
Energy and Homeland Security is expected to provide a major boost
for an emergency training center at the Hanford nuclear
reservation.
The agreement will mean advanced-level classes for federal, state
and local law enforcement officials in terrorism,
counterterrorism, weapons of mass destruction and critical
infrastructure protection will be offered at the HAMMER training
facility.
Until now, much of the training at HAMMER has focused on
Hanford-related activities, with some National Guard units and other
agencies using the center. With the signing of the agreement, HAMMER
is expected to emerge as the region's leading law-enforcement
training center involving the war on terror.
"We are very excited," said Connie Patrick, director of the Federal
Law Enforcement Training Center, which is part of the Department of
Homeland Security and offers training classes for 82 federal
agencies.
The federal center provides basic and advanced training for 50,000
officers a year. But Patrick said its two existing training
facilities, in New Mexico and South Carolina, are at maximum
capacity.
"This makes perfect sense," Patrick said of the agreement to use the
Hanford training center. "This will save money because we don't have
to build a new facility."
Patrick said FLETC and HAMMER officials have been talking for
several years about an agreement. She said she expected her agency's
use of the Hanford facility will grow in coming years.
"This is a significant document and it established a formal
relationship," said Jim Spracklen, a senior program adviser for the
Energy Department. "We've been friends for several years. Now, it's
like being engaged. We've made some commitments."
The agreement was signed during a meeting in Washington, D.C., of
the 50-member HAMMER steering committee.
Spracklen said FLETC has been "overwhelmed" since the terrorist
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the agreement should provide the
Hanford training center with a "major new business line."
"We want to grow HAMMER past our Hanford mission," Spracklen said.
"Hanford will still be our priority, but we want to expand."
FLETC will pay to use the Hanford facility and will provide its own
curriculum and instructors. The Energy Department will provide the
HAMMER site and support services, Spracklen said.
Spracklen said it was too early to tell how many more people will be
taught at HAMMER as a result of the agreement, but there was no
question the number would be going up.
"We have been working for two years to assure that the Department of
Homeland Security is aware of HAMMER's potential value for various
missions, and I believe this arrangement with the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center can lead to much greater involvement in
homeland security activities," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash.
The 80-acre HAMMER site opened nearly 10 years ago, and now roughly
1,000 classes a year are offered. The center offers classroom
instruction along with hands-on training involving life-sized props
in realistic settings.
The facility is named for Sam Volpentest, who was a leading advocate
for HAMMER and other Hanford projects and programs until he died at
age 101 in 2005.
Fluor Hanford operates HAMMER for the Energy Department.
© 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
47 FR DOE: Corrections and Updates to Technical Guidelines for Voluntary
Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Doc E7-6038
[Federal Register: April 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 62)] [Rules
and Regulations] [Page 15598-15600] From the Federal Register
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02ap07-2]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 300
RIN 1901-AB23
AGENCY: Office of Policy and International Affairs, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) published an interim final rule
on January 31, 2007, to correct, update, and make clarifying changes to
Technical Guidelines used for reporting under the Voluntary Reporting
of Greenhouse Gases Program authorized by section 1605(b) of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992. The Technical Guidelines were incorporated by
reference in final program guidelines that were published on April 21,
2006, and placed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). In
accordance with the rules governing incorporation by reference in the
CFR, DOE is required to amend its program regulations to reflect any
update of the Technical Guidelines. DOE now discusses the comments
received in response to the interim final rule, and adopts that rule as
final without change.
DATES: Effective April 2, 2007, the interim rule published on January
1, 2007 (72 FR 4211), which became effective March 2, 2007, is
confirmed as final.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Eule, PI-63, Office of Policy
and International Affairs, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington DC 20585, or e-mail:
1605bguidelines.comments@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Summary and Response to Comments
III. Congressional Notification
IV. Approval of the Office of Secretary
I. Background
Section 1605(b) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 directed DOE to
issue guidelines establishing a voluntary greenhouse gas reporting
program (42 U.S.C. 13385(b)). On February 14, 2002, the President
directed DOE, together with other involved Federal agencies, to
recommend reforms to enhance the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases Program established by DOE in 1994. On April 21, 2006, following
a lengthy public review process, DOE published revised final General
Guidelines for Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Reporting (71 FR 20784). Those
guidelines incorporated by reference detailed Technical Guidelines,
dated March 2006, that are needed to fully implement the revised
Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program.
Subsequent to the April 21, 2006 publication of the revised final
General Guidelines and during preparation of new forms and instructions
for reporting, DOE identified a number of errors and inconsistencies in
the Technical Guidelines that warranted correction or clarification. To
ensure that any revision of the March 2006 Technical Guidelines
addressed as many of these problems as possible, on August 3, 2006, DOE
sent a message by electronic mail to all persons who had previously
expressed an interest in the guidelines and requested that they
identify any needed technical corrections, clarifications,
interpretations or other changes to the guidelines. Subsequently, DOE
received communications that recommended additional corrections and
other changes for consideration.
[[Page 15599]]
Following a careful review of the recommended corrections and other
suggested changes, DOE made those modifications to the Technical
Guidelines that it believed were necessary to correct all the
identified errors and inconsistencies or other ambiguities, while
adhering to the essential language and intent of the March 2006 version
of the Technical Guidelines. The updated version of the Technical
Guidelines is dated January 2007. As required by the regulations of the
Administrative Committee of the Federal Register, DOE sent the January
2007 update of the Technical Guidelines to the Director of the Federal
Register and obtained his approval of the incorporation by reference of
the January 2007 Technical Guidelines in the regulations for the
section 1605(b) program that are published in the Federal Register and
the Code of Federal Regulations. On January 31, 2007, DOE published an
interim final rule with opportunity for comment that changed the date
of the Technical Guidelines incorporated by 10 CFR 300.13 from March
2006 to January 2007. (72 FR 4411.)
II. Summary and Response to Comments
DOE received six sets of comments in response to the interim final
rule. All of the comments are posted on the internet at the following
website: http://www.pi.energy.gov/enhancingGHGregistry/comments2007.html.
None of the comments identified errors or
inconsistencies in the January 2007 Technical Guidelines that would
impair their implementation by the Energy Information Administration
(EIA). DOE has decided not to adopt changes at this time so that EIA
can complete the forms, instructions, and software expeditiously to
permit reporting under the new guidelines in 2007 for the 2006
reporting year. However, some of the comments did identify further
corrections or updates that may be warranted some time in the future.
The specific comments provided fall into four main categories; those
that:
Identified inconsistencies, drafting errors or clarity
problems in the Technical Guidelines that may warrant further
corrections.
Proposed to add or reference new measurement methods or
calculation tools.
Sought to reopen some issues that had been previously
resolved during the development of the guidelines published on April
21, 2006.
Proposed changes that exceed the DOE's statutory
authority.
Possible Further Corrections. The comments submitted by the Edison
Electric Institute and supported by comments from Ameren identified a
number of additional, but comparatively minor inconsistencies, drafting
errors or clarity problems in the January 2007 Technical Guidelines
that may warrant further corrections. Comments by the American Forest
and Paper Association (AF&PA) also identified a reference in the
Forestry appendix that requires updating as well as an inconsistency
between the terminology used in the Technical Guidelines and that used
by the industry to refer to ``spent pulping liquors''.
DOE sees the value of making most of the changes that fall into
this category, although none of these changes are necessary to enable
the EIA to initiate reporting under the corrected Technical Guidelines
dated January 2007. Since making these changes at this time could cause
some confusion among prospective reporters and may further delay EIA's
efforts to finalize its revised reporting forms and instructions, DOE
has decided not to implement these changes at this time. Instead, DOE
plans to address these changes when DOE proposes its first substantive
amendments to the guidelines pursuant to 10 CFR 300.1(f).
Measurement Methods or Calculation Tools. Comments submitted by
Beta Analytic, Inc., proposed that the guidelines be amended to
recognize a new method for measuring biogenic or carbon-neutral CO2 or
methane emissions which represent part, but not all, of various
emission streams.
Similarly, AF&PA's comments recommended that a specific calculation
tool developed by the International Council of Forests and Paper
Associations be referenced in the Technical Guidelines as an acceptable
model for estimating the harvested wood products pool.
While the amendments proposed by Beta Analytic, Inc., and AF&PA may
be worthwhile, they are outside the scope of this rulemaking, which is
limited to correcting factual and drafting errors, eliminating
inconsistencies, updating certain existing references, clarifying
intent, and modifying or eliminating certain inappropriate calculation
methods. Those organizations may formally propose that DOE adopt these
methods when it undertakes to make substantive revisions to the
guidelines pursuant to 10 CFR 300.1(f). Proposed calculation methods
should be submitted in writing to the Assistant Secretary for Policy
and International Affairs, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC,
20585, with an electronic copy sent to
1605bguidelines.comments@hq.doe.gov. DOE will consider all such
proposed methods. Any such proposal will be subject to public review
and comment. If adopted, new calculation methods would be implemented
as soon as practicable.
Issues Previously Resolved. The comments submitted by AF&PA also
raised two issues that were previously considered and resolved during
the development of the revised General Guidelines and Technical
Guidelines that were published in April 2006. One issue concerns the
treatment of carbon harvested from sustainably managed forests that is
ultimately included in various long lived wood products. AF&PA proposed
a change that would enable such carbon to be counted toward an entity's
emission reductions, although the initial March 2006 Technical
Guidelines and the January 2007 revised Technical Guidelines exclude
such treatment. The other issue concerns the value to be used to
represent the transmission and distribution losses associated with off-
site combined heat and power plants. This value was also set by the
March 2006 Technical Guidelines and was not changed in the January 2007
Technical Guidelines.
Section 300.1(f) of the General Guidelines indicates that DOE
intends to periodically review and update the General Guidelines and
Technical Guidelines, and that it anticipates that these reviews will
occur approximately every three years. During these periodic reviews,
DOE may reconsider any of the issues initially resolved by the April
2006 guidelines. DOE will solicit stakeholder input at the start of any
such review process.
Changes that Exceed DOE's Statutory Authority. One commenter
recommended that DOE change this program from a voluntary reporting
program to one that is mandatory. Such a change would clearly exceed
DOE's existing statutory authority under section 1605(b) of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992.
Conclusion. Based on a review of the six comments received, DOE has
decided not to make any changes at this time to the January 2007
Technical Guidelines, which became effective on March 2, 2007. When DOE
proposes amendments to add new measurement methods or calculation tools
to the January 2007 Technical Guidelines, it may incorporate some of
the corrections suggested in the public comments summarized above.
[[Page 15600]]
III. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will submit to Congress a report
regarding the issuance of today's final rule. The report will state
that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 801(2).
IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved the publication of this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR part 300
Administrative practice and procedure, Energy, Gases, Incorporation
by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC on March 27, 2007.
Katharine A. Fredriksen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs.
0
Accordingly, the interim final rule amending part 300 of title 10,
chapter II, subchapter B of the Code of Federal Regulations, that was
published at 72 FR 4411 on January 31, 2007, is adopted as a final rule
without change.
[FR Doc. E7-6038 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
48 UPI: DOE Inspector: Computers insecure
United Press International - Security & Terrorism -
4/2/2007 10:43:00 AM -0400
WASHINGTON, April 2 (UPI) -- A new report finds that computer
security in the U.S. Department of Energy's Counterintelligence
Directorate is "inadequate."
The Inspector General of the DOE conducted the investigation to
"determine the adequacy of internal controls over computer property
maintained by the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence's
Counterintelligence Directorate (CN) Headquarters program office," a
press release from the Office of the Inspector General stated.
Among its findings, the investigation revealed that the
Counterintelligence Directorate could not locate 20 desktop
computers listed on its property inventory. "While any loss of a
computer is troubling, this situation is compounded by the fact that
at least 14 of the computers were known to have processed classified
information," the report states.
In addition, the Inspector General found that 57 computers were not
included on CN's property inventory, as required by Department of
Energy Property Management Standards; loan agreements for 96
Headquarters computers that were located at CN field sites had
expired; and labels indicating the classification level of
individual computers were not affixed to 74 CN computers, as
required.
The Inspector General requested that a plan to correct the
inadequate security measures be submitted within 90 days.
The Counterintelligence Directorate is part of the Office of
Intelligence and Counterintelligence and is responsible for
safeguarding DOE's sensitive data and operations against espionage
by foreign entities.
© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
49 The Hindu: US lab comes calling
Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications
Monday, Apr 02, 2007
Vinson Kurian
Oak Ridge National Laboratory is setting up its India operations in
collaboration with Technopark, Thiruvananthapuram. It tells eWorld
why.
The laboratory is in the final stages of a $350-million project to
provide a modern campus for the next generation of `great science.'
Billy Stair
Cost pressures, shorter product life cycles and regulatory
challenges are forcing leading multinationals to move their R&D base
to developing nations, especially China and India. Frost and
Sullivan estimates that the R&D outsourcing market in India will
grow from $1.3 billion to about $9 billion by the year 2010.
The latest entrant into this happening sector is a science and
technology laboratory behemoth in the US - Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (ORNL). It is setting up its India operations in
collaboration with Technopark, Thiruvananthapuram.
ORNL is a multi-programme science and technology laboratory managed
for the US Department of Energy by University of Tennessee and
Battelle. Scientists and engineers at ORNL conduct basic and applied
research and development to create scientific knowledge and
technological solutions that strengthen US leadership in key areas
of science; increase the availability of clean, abundant energy;
restore and protect the environment; and contribute to national
security.
ORNL also performs other work for the Department of Energy (DOE),
including isotope production, information management, and technical
program management, and provides research and technical assistance
to other organisations.
ORNL is the Department of Energy's largest science and energy
laboratory. It was established in 1943 as a part of the secret
Manhattan Project to pioneer a method for producing and separating
plutonium.
During the 1950s and 1960s and with the creation of DOE in the
1970s, it became an international centre for the study of nuclear
energy and related research in the physical and life sciences. By
the turn of the century, the laboratory supported the nation with a
peacetime science and technology mission that was just as important
as, but very different from, the days of the Manhattan Project.
ORNL has staff of more than 4,200 and annually hosts approximately
3,000 guest researchers who spend two weeks or longer in Oak Ridge.
Its funding exceeds $1 billion.
The laboratory is in the final stages of a $350-million project to
provide a modern campus for the next generation of `great science.'
A combination of federal, state, and private funds is supporting the
construction of 13 new facilities. Included in these new facilities
are the Laboratory for Comparative and Functional Genomics, the
Nanoscience Centre, the Advanced Microscopy Laboratory, the Office
of Science's Leadership Computing Facility for unclassified
high-performance computing, and the State-funded joint institutes
for computational sciences, biological sciences, and neutron
sciences.
The ORNL and software companies in Technopark have formed a
Technology Collaboration Council (TCC) based on an initiative taken
by the travel-transportation-logistics player IBS Software. The TCC
intends to progressively explore areas of potential collaboration.
Both parties will identify areas of common interest for research and
development and focus on opportunities to exchange personnel to work
on technically challenging projects, and participate in lecturers
and seminars.
V. K. Mathews, Chairman and Managing Director, IBS Group, says
research is an integral part of the plan that Technopark companies
use to create solutions and provide services for their clients.
There are potential areas of synergy between ORNL and Technopark.
The purpose of the TCC is to empower Technopark companies to harness
the potential that ORNL offers.
According to Jeffrey Wadsworth, Director, ORNL, this alliance will
significantly enhance research and development capabilities.
"Besides, this will open new avenues in the way we conduct our
research and manage projects by adopting the remote operations
methodology practised at Technopark."
eWorld spoke to Billy Stair, Director, Communications and External
Relations, ORNL, on the lab's plans for India. Excerpts:
What has drawn ORNL to India?
Oak Ridge National Laboratory is managed by UT-Battelle, a
partnership between the University of Tennessee and Battelle,
America's largest not-for-profit research institution. UT-Battelle
is attracted to India by a number of factors.
Perhaps most important, India is a democracy that places a high
value on individual freedoms, intellectual property and the free
market system. As in America, this culture of freedom is reflected
in the creativity of the Indian entrepreneur and makes it easier to
establish lasting business relationships.
During their visit to India, the UT-Battelle delegation met several
individuals who had worked at ORNL in the past. A combination of
these factors, added to a common language, makes a partnership
between India and UT-Battelle a natural one.
In retrospect, do you think the anti-outsourcing campaign was
overdone?
The growing integration of the world's economy will continue to
bring about the movement of jobs, which in turn will create anxiety
in areas where jobs are lost. This will not change, either in
America or India. Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory are
developing new technologies that will generate new products, new
companies and new jobs. So long as this process continues, both
nations can look forward to continued economic expansion.
Outsourcing agencies are said to be worried about probable loss of
control in processes and proprietary knowledge. How does ORNL
propose to deal with this?
Battelle has operated research laboratories and other business
operations around the world for more than 50 years. The ability to
manage both operations and proprietary knowledge is a challenge that
Battelle has met successfully in a variety of nations in both Europe
and Asia.
Going forward, would you look at alliances with local companies,
contractual outsourcing arrangements or even establishing local
subsidiaries?
UT-Battelle is evaluating a number of options and opportunities. It
is impossible at this stage to predict a particular business model
until more fundamental decisions have been reached about the nature
of UT-Battelle's investment.
Is transfer of technology in the realm of things at all, especially
in the context of ORNL leadership in energy-related technology?
Some technologies at Oak Ridge National Laboratory are "classified"
by the US Government, meaning that they cannot be shared with other
nations. The laboratory also has a broad range of research and
technologies that is not classified.
Perhaps more important, it is possible that teams of ORNL and Indian
scientists can work together on problems of mutual interest. We have
been quietly exploring some of these issues since our return from
India.
Do you think the prevailing regulatory environment in India favours
the growth of R&D outsourcing?
This is an area that we need to understand better than we do at
present. Regulatory systems vary greatly from country to country.
The regulatory system is a gap in our current understanding of
India's economy.
vinson@thehindu.co.in
Copyright © 2007, The Hindu Business Line.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************