***************************************************************** 09/23/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.223 ***************************************************************** 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 US: starbulletin.com: How big of a problem is global warming? 2 US: starbulletin.com: How big of a problem is global warming? 3 AU ABC: Govt's clean energy target 'doesn't support renewables' NUCLEAR REACTORS 4 The Hindu: Nuke deal: wait till new US regime assumes office, says C 5 US: TheStar.com: Manitoba's energy savings plan no yawner 6 US: St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Financing the next generation of nuclea 7 US: APP.COM - Oyster Creek emergency drill met with high marks, skep 8 US: London Times: British Energy up on nuclear plant hopes - 9 US: News-Leader.com: Nuclear reactor an unclean, dangerous source fo 10 US: baltimoresun.com: Nuclear revival a mix of hope and fear 11 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Boosters say N-power not doomed in long term 12 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Vt. lawmakers' letter calls nuclear plant' 13 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Lawmakers will push for nuclear power despite 14 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear power ready to rally 15 US: Salt Lake Tribune: No nukes: Nuclear power plant plans should be 16 The Hindu: Nuke pact a pretext to exert political pressure on India 17 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Radioactive mind control 18 Press TV: US, Canada to build N-reactor for Yemen 19 AFP: Nuclear energy to be key in low-carbon energy policy - Brussels 20 US: Daily Herald: No nuke plant in Utah for now 21 IAEA: Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities 22 US: Amarillo.com: Rick Perry: Let's seek new ways to keep the lights 23 Guardian Unlimited: Why we need our own nuclear power | Comment | 24 US: TheDay.com: No Need For New Nukes In State 25 Hindustan Times: Yes to N-power, no to 123 26 US: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Nuclear refueling, more work set at S 27 Earth Times: CPI-M to discuss nuclear deal next week - India World 28 US: Victoria Advocate: The long wait for nuclear power NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 29 US: islandpacket.com: State officials must put public's interests fi 30 US: OpEdNews: One Step Farther Back from a DU War? 31 IAEA: PACT Day at the General Conference 32 US: PE: Old-time plans considered nuclear blasts to do dirty work | NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 33 The Hindu: Pak to establish uranium conversion, enrichment facility 34 Nevada Appeal: Nevada should turn off the water on an arrogant feder 35 Pahrump Valley Times: County quartet: Scandinavia tour conforms Yucc PEACE 36 Investigate Israeli Nuclear Capacity Now 37 Iran warns West against attack 38 Daily Yomiuri: Poll: N. Korea biggest issue for Japanese 39 TheStar.com: The mystery of the air raid sirens 40 The Free Press: War in Iraq 41 Haaretz: Report: IDF raid seized nuclear material before Syria air s 42 Project Syndicate: Commentaries: Nuclear Steps Undermine Peace by Ji 43 Reuters: Cheney mulled Israeli strike on Iran: Newsweek | U.S. | 44 UPI: Israeli attack on Syria had U.S. blessing 45 US: UPI: Pentagon studying nuke incident US DEPT. OF ENERGY 46 Yakima Herald Republic: Black Rock Reservoir-- Hanford cleanup failu 47 SF New Mexican: Science `worth fighting for' 48 TNJN.com: UT Nuclear Engineering receives $2.25 million 49 lamonitor.com: Rally for labs draws mixed crowd 50 KOB.com: Funding of NM's labs debated ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 starbulletin.com: How big of a problem is global warming? Vol. 12, Issue 266 - Sunday, September 23, 2007 Jackie M. Young Ordnance-pocked island still awaits final cleanup What's the future of Kaho'olawe? The small, 44-square-mile island southwest of Maui was used as a bombing range for the U.S. military for 50 years after the outbreak of World War II. But in 1976, the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana filed suit in federal court to stop the bombing and to preserve the island's archaeological and cultural resources. (The PKO is best known for the tragic loss at sea of activists George Helm and Kimo Mitchell on March 6, 1977, in rough waters off of Kaho'olawe on a single surfboard the two were sharing.) In 1980, the PKO and the Navy entered into a consent decree that permitted continued military training, but which also allowed the PKO to begin cleaning and revitalizing the island; in 1990, President George H.W. Bush ordered an end to live-fire training on the island; and in 1994, the Navy finally transferred title of Kaho'olawe back to the state of Hawaii. In anticipation of the hand-off, the state established the Kaho'olawe Island Reserve Commission in 1993 to manage the island and its resources. Sol P. Kaho'ohalahala, KIRC executive director and a member of PKO since 1979, explained in a public talk on Aug. 8 at the University of Hawaii-Manoa, what the future held for Kaho'olawe. "There used to be all sorts of native birds and vegetation on the island originally, such as the pueo (owl), alala (crow), hau, palupalu o Kanaloa, and pili grass (shrubs and grasses)," said Kaho'ohalahala. "We'd like to bring them back, but it's taking a long time. "Also, we have a rain catchment system utilizing auwai (irrigation ditches) for the plants, and we have a water desalination system," said Kaho'ohalahala of the island that was known for its lack of fresh water. "The native Hawaiians were very good engineers -- most people don't know that. They built complex ahupuaa fishponds with sluice gates, and hale that could withstand hurricanes and tsunamis." Only subsistence fishing is allowed near the island, but they hope in the future to begin planting crops for consumption. Helicopters are currently used for transportation, but a dedicated sea vessel is being considered, as well as renewable energy sources such as the sun, wind and ocean. "We currently have communications capability by microwave between Maui, Lana'i, and Kaho'olawe," noted Kaho'ohalahala. "As our energy resources improve, there will be more options for communications alternatives as well." The Navy continued to clear military ordnance until 2003, but Kaho'ohalahala said only 74 percent of the surface ordnance is gone, and a mere 9 percent of the subsurface ordnance down to 4 feet is cleared. The KIRC works only in areas that are said to be cleared, and restricts access to areas that are not. But the federal trust fund set up to clean up the island has insufficient funds left to complete the job. Unfortunately, Kaho'ohalahala doesn't think it's the right political climate now to push for additional congressional funds, but "we must be vigilant." Despite the progress being made on Kaho'olawe, it's disappointing to hear that the U.S. military will be leaving one more island in the Pacific in disrepair because of its actions. Nuclear tests in the 1950s and '60s on Bikini Atoll, Christmas Island, Johnston Atoll and Enewetak Atoll come to mind. Military experiments in Hawaii continue to this day. It's outrageous that the Navy didn't fulfill its responsibility and complete the cleanup of Kaho'olawe. No wonder native Hawaiians are so angry. And so should we be. For more information on Kaho'olawe, contact the KIRC at (808) 243-5020, or the PKO at its Web site (kahoolawe.org). Jackie M. Young is a freelance journalist who recently graduated from the University of Hawaii-Manoa. She has an interest in Native Hawaiian issues, having taken Hawaiian language and Hawaiian studies courses. © Honolulu Star-Bulletin -- http://starbulletin.com ***************************************************************** 2 starbulletin.com: How big of a problem is global warming? Vol. 12, Issue 266 - Sunday, September 23, 2007 CRAIG T. KOJIMA / CKOJIMA@STARBULLETIN.COM Searchers look for depleted uranium shells fired during the 1960's at a Schofield Barracks firing range. Using a GPS, the two-man team, one carrying the equipment and the other leading the way, use a grid system to search a predetermined area. Clearing the past The Army will search in the Makua area for depleted uranium left over from weapons tests By Gregg K. Kakesako gkakesako@starbulletin.com The Army will continue to investigate whether weapons fired in the Makua Military Reservation contained depleted uranium, a key Pentagon official maintains. Tad Davis -- deputy assistant Army secretary for environment, safety and occupational health -- said spotting rounds containing depleted uranium and fired during training in the 1960s have been detected at Schofield Barracks and the Big Island's Pohakuloa Training Area. However, heavy vegetation at Makua hampered aerial surveys conducted in the Waianae Coast valley. The Army and the state have already said that the small amounts of depleted uranium used on island training ranges don't threaten public health. "We have not given up," Davis said. "In my view Makua continues to be part of the investigative process. ..." Davis added: "Until we can either confirm it or disprove it, we will continue to treat it as if something possibly is there." He said the next step will be to check the ground-water monitoring sites at Makua. The suspected areas are where spotting rounds from the Davy Crockett weapons system were fired. Depleted uranium was used in the Davy Crockett as aiming rounds because its density matched the trajectory of the warhead. The Davy Crockett could fire a 75-pound nuclear projectile. STAR-BULLETIN / JANUARY 2006 This is one of 15 depleted uranium tail assemblies found in a Schofield Barracks firing range. The assemblies are remnants from training rounds used in a 1960s weapons system. Depleted uranium is a byproduct of radioactive enriched uranium and has been used by the U.S. military in bullets and other weapons designed to pierce armor. Some researchers suspect exposure to depleted uranium may have caused chronic fatigue and other symptoms in veterans of the first Gulf War, but there is no conclusive evidence it has. Kyle Kajihiro, program director of the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker- affiliated social justice and peace organization, has called for independent analysis and oversight. "We don't have any confidence in their (the Army's) assessment that it's safe or that public health has been protected," Kajihiro said. One of the indicators that aiming rounds containing depleted uranium were used at Pohakuloa and Schofield Barracks were the discoveries of 3- to 6-foot long gray cylinders. These cylinders were used to fire the rounds, the Army said. The cylinders were found by a contractor in 2005 who had been hired to clear a Schofield Barracks firing range of unexploded ordnance and other debris. Similar cylinders were found this summer at Pohakuloa. However, none has been detected in Makua Valley because of the heavy vegetation. Davis said the Army has ruled out the use of the practice of "proscribed burns" where fires are deliberately set to rid an area of heavy shrubbery. "The challenge you have using proscribed burns at Makua," Davis said, "is that you have the possible adverse impact on the cultural sites there and the fact that you have endangered plants there." There also is a lot of unexploded ordnance in the suspected areas, Davis added. Davis said by the end of next month, the Army will have completed its initial investigation into the extent and scope of the depleted uranium problem here. Davis was in the islands last week to meet with the Waianae Coast Neighborhood Board Wednesday night to brief it on the status of ridding the area of convention munitions that were dumped into the ocean. Studies conducted last year revealed that more than 2,000 conventional or nonchemical weapons were found in the waters known as Ordnance Reef. A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study found no immediate health dangers to the public in the sediment and fish found in the area. That study cost about $250,000. But an additional $1 million may have to be spent to answer concerns raised by area residents about the safety of the limu, crab and other shellfish found in the area, Davis said, While the study is being conducted, Davis said, the military will continue to explore ways to rid the area of the sunken ordnance. At the same time, Davis said, there is a need to look at other activities in the area such as the Waianae waste-water treatment plant and run-off from industries in the area which may be factors in some of the health problems reported by area residents. He said the Army is also working with the Navy in trying to determine the effect sea water has on munitions dumped into the ocean. "How long does it take for the outer layers of these munitions to corrode?" is just one of the questions the Navy is trying to answer, Davis said. © Honolulu Star-Bulletin -- http://starbulletin.com 500 Ala Moana Blvd. #7-210, Honolulu, HI 96813 808-529-4747 ***************************************************************** 3 AU ABC: Govt's clean energy target 'doesn't support renewables' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Updated September 23, 2007 19:01:00 Labor's Peter Garrett says the Govt's plan could mean less renewable energy is actually produced. (File photo) (Getty Images: Patrick Riviere) The Federal Opposition has strongly criticised the Government's announcement of a clean energy target, saying it represents a backward step for the renewable energy sector. Prime Minister John Howard says the national target will replace existing state and territory schemes, and would see about 15 per cent of energy produced by zero and low emissions technology by 2020. That will include solar and wind, but could also mean energy from fossil fuels - if the carbon emissions are captured and stored. "This is a major cost saving and regulatory breakthrough," Mr Howard said. Industry groups have welcomed the scheme, saying it creates much more certainty for the sector, which will encourage investment. But Labor's environment spokesman Peter Garrett does not agree. He says it could mean less renewable energy is actually produced. "This clean energy target is all about rationalising existing schemes," he said. "It opens up the renewable energy target to nuclear power, and it will not and can not represent any advance, or any increase, or any support of any significance for our renewable energy sector. "We need substantial, committed and significant increases in the mandatory renewable energy target in order to increase the use of renewable energy." Also, the Greens have described the clean energy target announced by the Government as a farce. Greens leader Bob Brown says the Government should be matching the European schemes, which call for 20 per cent of energy by 2020 to be renewable. "This is no new action by the Government and it's going to throw in so-called clean coal, and potentially nuclear as part of the mix," he said. "What a farce in this sunny country of ours." ***************************************************************** 4 The Hindu: Nuke deal: wait till new US regime assumes office, says CPI-M Saturday, September 22, 2007 : 2115 Hrs Bangalore, Sept. 22 (PTI): After asking the UPA Government to put on hold the Indo-US nuclear deal for six months, CPI(M) today hinted that it wants New Delhi to wait even further -- till the new adminstration assumes office in the US in 16 months. "We say that new President, new administration, new dispensation that comes in the US...let's see what their attitude is (towards the deal). What's the great hurry,?" CPI (M) Politburo member Sitaram Yechury asked at a seminar on "Indo-US Nuclear Agreement" here. Yechury said while opinion polls in the US showed George W Bush as the "most hated" President in the recent memory, for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, he (Bush) is the "best president". According to him, the Government itself has said that it would take a minimum of one decade before the nuclear power generation would start as a result of the deal. "If that's the case, why are you (government) rushing through it," he asked at the seminar, organised by Bangalore unit of "People for India Forum". Yechury said if the Government believes that "delay" means the deal "cannot be done throgh", it should raise the same "slogan" that it maintained during WTO negotiations -- "no deal is better than a bad deal". CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat last week had asked the UPA Government to refrain from taking any step for the next six months to operationalise the deal. The deal has to be stopped by all of us," Yechury said adding, the left parties would "finally" tell the UPA Government to choose between the "interest and opinion" of the Indian people and "promises" it made to Bush. Yechury said Bush is trying to pressurise India on the deal because he wants to show it to American people that he has revived the nuclear reactor industry in the US, which had remained idle for the last three decades. "And for that revival, he is showing urgency and putting pressure," he said. According to Yechury, while it would cost Rs 3,30,000 crore to produce 30,000 MW of nuclear power, the same capacity can be added using hydro and coal resources in the region for Rs 90,000 crore - Rs 1,20,000 crore. "At this cost, is it worth it? Why do you need nuclear energy when other options are available?," he asked. Washington is pushing for the deal partly because it does not want India to pursue production of nuclear power with thorium as fuel. As much as 70 per cent of the world's known thorium resources are in India, he said. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 5 TheStar.com: Manitoba's energy savings plan no yawner comment | | Today's Toronto Star | Star P.M. Sep 23, 2007 04:30 AM Sept. 21 The Star may be bored by talk of Manitoba's energy efficiency, but we could save a lot of cash and prevent pollution if we paid attention to what our neighbours are up to. Manitoba is doing energy efficiency with a vengeance, freeing power to sell at a not-so-ho-hum profit. Ontario only talks a good game. As the boring details of its energy plan show, only 65 per cent of identified cost-effective, achievable conservation potential will be pursued. According to the fine print, they'd rather spend $2.76 per unit of energy on new nuclear and gas plants when $1 spent on energy efficiency would do the same job. Using less energy may not offer ribbon-cutting opportunities, but it's better for our pocketbooks and our planet. Keith Stewart, World Wildlife Fund Canada, Toronto © Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2007 | ***************************************************************** 6 St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Financing the next generation of nuclear power plants By William H. Miller 09/23/2007 Nuclear power, with global warming and energy security at stake, needs $5 billion in government loan guarantees for each of the first few nuclear power plants to be built in the United States. Providing this credit support would help prevent greater costs down the road — in response to electricity shortages, ever-increasing reliance on imported oil and environmental harm from the emissions of fossil-fuel plants. Notwithstanding charges by anti-nuclear groups like Greenpeace and Public Citizen that loan guarantees are a subsidy to the nuclear industry, the guarantees, if managed properly, will cost taxpayers nothing. The loan-guarantee program is designed to be self-financing, with companies responsible for paying an upfront fee to cover the estimated cost of the guarantee. The benefits from loan guarantees would be huge. To meet growing demand for clean energy, 17 electrical companies are gearing up to build 33 nuclear power plants using standardized designs and advanced technology. Although improvements have been made in the reactor licensing process and project management to eliminate unnecessary delays, the first few plants will cost more than the rest, because it has been many years since construction of a nuclear plant in the United States, and the companies that build the first new plants will face extra expenses that subsequent companies will not have to bear. For example, there are "first-of-a-kind" design and engineering costs. And there is no absolute assurance that hitches in licensing and construction might not happen, causing project costs to rise, much as they did when today's nuclear plants were built in the 1970s and 1980s. Recognizing this, Congress in the 2005 Energy Policy Act authorized guarantees to new nuclear plants to provide some extra surety. Without loan guarantees, banks would not provide companies with the low-cost financing they need. The guarantees will enable nuclear plant operators to obtain financing at favorable rates. This directly benefits consumers because it will save about a third of the cost of electricity from a new plant. Nuclear power, however, will have to compete for the same loan guarantees with other clean-energy technologies, including methods for sequestering carbon emissions from coal plants, designing more fuel-efficient vehicles and using switch grass and other cellulosic sources to make ethanol. Now, some members of Congress, heedless of the economic and environmental consequences, want to bar nuclear plants from the loan-guarantee program or, short of that, place severe restrictions on the portion of the program reserved for nuclear power. It's encouraging to know that, despite differences over energy policy, several presidential candidates recognize the need for additional nuclear power. Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Barack Obama, D-Ill., and John McCain, R-Ariz., support federal incentives to power companies to build more nuclear plants. McCain says there is "no way that you could ever seriously attack the issue of greenhouse gas emissions without nuclear power, and anybody who tells you differently is not telling the truth." Nuclear power today compares favorably with other energy sources. Because nuclear plants are performing more efficiently than in the past and their fuel costs are relatively cheap, the cost of producing nuclear-generated electricity is slightly less than the cost of producing power at coal plants and one-third the cost of electricity from plants fueled with natural gas. Nuclear power's competitive edge is likely to widen once the government begins regulating carbon emissions or Congress approves a carbon tax. Loan guarantees for new nuclear plants are a relatively painless way to deal with the potentially devastating effects of energy shortages, imported oil and global warming. And that's something Congress should keep in mind. William H. Miller is a professor at the Nuclear Science and Engineering Institute at the university of missouri and at the University's research reactor. ***************************************************************** 7 APP.COM - Oyster Creek emergency drill met with high marks, skepticism | Asbury Park Press Online Saturday, September 22, 2007 Critics say real disaster would be much more challenging BY KIRK MOORE TOMS RIVER BUREAU Post Comment BERKELEY — Federal inspectors gave state, county and Exelon Corp. officials high marks in a preliminary assessment of Tuesday's emergency drill at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey, while anti-nuclear activists expressed their continued skepticism that any response to a real emergency would work as planned. Ocean County emergency workers and officials displayed "direction and control that was very good," said Rebecca Thomas, who heads the radiological preparedness program for the Federal Emergency Management Agency Region II office and gave the preliminary assessment Friday. "You could tell they've been working together for years at this," Thomas told about a dozen people gathered at the county emergency operations center at Robert J. Miller Airpark here. FEMA inspectors were likewise impressed by the "excellent new state EOC (emergency operations center) facility" in Mercer County, which they evaluated for the first time since State Police completed the project. Thomas said communication worked well among all participants and facilities, and interoperability of radio equipment was not an issue. Critics of the nuclear plant questioned Thomas and Rosemarie Chisholm-Cohen of the Sheriff's Department Emergency Management Office about the involvement of private day-care centers in evacuation planning. Chisholm-Cohen said the county invited day-care center directors in for two training sessions in the past year, and saw about three dozen participate. Peggi Sturmfels of the New Jersey Environmental Federation told Thomas that some school administrators she's talked to still have doubts about emergency school evacuation plans, which would marshal additional buses for evacuating students to refuges like Richard Stockton College of New Jersey in Galloway, Atlantic County. Thomas replied that the bus companies involved "have been visited and evaluated by us." Critic Paula Gotsch pressed on. "Things aren't going to happen orderly," she said, noting that even some county elected officials have expressed skepticism over evacuation plans. "If you have an accident with a plume coming up, it will be chaos." "We have reasonable assurance the public will be protected," Thomas said. "There's no way to have absolute assurance." Evacuation studies have shown that discrete areas within a critical 10-mile radius of the Lacey plant can be evacuated in stages, determined by wind and weather conditions, Thomas said. "The idea is not to outrun the plume," but to determine only whether people in a downwind area should move, and adapt the response to changing conditions, she said. During the drill, "we do throw in traffic accidents and other impediments" to see how local agencies respond, she added. Critic Jeff Brown suggested authorities can't count on the population around the plant sitting tight until they're told to evacuate. "You're aware that at Three Mile Island (the site of a 1979 nuclear accident in Pennsylvania), about 100 times as many people evacuated than were expected," he said. The Tuesday evening drill was "a full-scale exercise" involving seven towns, county and state agencies, the Red Cross and other volunteer groups, Thomas said. It's one of 64 biennial tests of emergency plans and procedures around the nation's 64 commercial nuclear power plants, she said. Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 London Times: British Energy up on nuclear plant hopes - September 22, 2007 Robert Lindsay Bill Coley, chief executive of British Energy, seems to have sent a strong message to investors in the nuclear power station operator when he met them in London yesterday. British Energy shares soared 32p to 520˝p aided by institutions switching out of Drax, now demoted from the blue chips, and talk that the Government was sure to give the green light to new nuclear stations after the end of its consultation on October 10. Cazenove, the broker, believes that British Energy’s existing sites are the best locations and there could be a bidding war for the land from rival developers, such as Centrica, off 1˝p. Cazenove reiterated “buy” advice on British Energy with a 660p price target. Northern Rock was the second-best performer, up 9Ľp, buoyed by investors who followed the purchases by the aggressive hedge fund manager Philip Richards, of RAB Capital. However, one arbitrage dealer said he was betting on the Rock changing hands at zero value to investors. “With Mervyn King [Govener of the Bank of England] under pressure from politicians, who’s going to care about investors in the City?” he said. Andy Hornby, chief executive of HBOS, up 10p at 847p, has ruled out having any part in a rescue of Rock, according to James Irvine, of Dresdner Kleinwort, who met him on Wednesday night. He says that HBOS’s Halifax aims to capitalise on its rival’s woes by refusing to chase volume and increasing its margins — in other words raising the price of new mortgages. HBOS was also rumoured to be eyeing a joint bid for the Irish Nationwide building society, worth up to Ł1 billion, with Quinlan Private. Sage continued to rise on vague bid talk, up 6Ľp. Although India’s Infosys has ruled itself out, there is talk that the US groups Intuit or Microsoft may be interested. Results next month may be better than expected. Resolution kept rising, up 18Ľp after opening its books to Pearl and Standard Life, up 1Ľp. Shire was up 21p at Ł11.77 after Citigroup said that it would become a takeover target once its Vyvanse hyperactivity drug had proved itself. Kingfisher, owner of B&Q, led the blue chip fallers, down 6.3p at 174.7p as worries about a housing market slowdown continued to weigh on it. JPMorgan believes that it will sell its Chinese B&Q business early next year and has a 256p share-price target. Home Retail Group, owner of Homebase, was down 7Ľp. Wolseley continued to slide, off 18p at 848˝itsresults on Monday will not be pretty as the US housing market is still collapsing. Some analysts say Wolseley will struggle to make further staff cuts that will prove necessary. London Stock Exchange leapt 113p to a high of Ł18.00 after Nasdaq placed its remaining 3.5 per cent stake. PartyGaming was the top FTSE 250 performer, bouncing 2Ľat26p after recent falls. © Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 9 News-Leader.com: Nuclear reactor an unclean, dangerous source for energy Opinions ozarks Opinions Published Saturday, September 22, 2007 JOSEPH J. MANGANO » The Ameren Corporation recently announced it was considering building a new nuclear reactor next to its existing reactor at the Callaway plant, between Fulton and Jefferson City. The new reactor would generate 1600 megawatts of electricity, much greater than any of the 104 U.S. reactors now in use. Like other utilities trying to revive the nuclear industry, which has been dormant for decades, Ameren's rationale is that Missouri's growing energy needs can best be met by nuclear power, which will not add to greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. But the absence of greenhouse gas emissions doesn't mean that nuclear energy is clean. Reactors create huge amounts of radioactivity in their cores, some of which is stored as waste at the plant. The radioactivity at a typical plant is equal to hundreds of Hiroshima bombs and lasts for thousands of years. Building another reactor would double the amount of radioactivity, and double the health risk from a large release of radioactivity. A meltdown from mechanical failure or act of sabotage would be the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history. Thousands would be stricken with acute radiation poisoning or cancer, and a substantial area near the plant would no longer be livable. A meltdown may not be inevitable, but it certainly is possible. A report last year cited two "near miss" situations in the past 20 years in which the current reactor at Callaway could have experienced a large-scale accident. But it doesn't necessarily take another Chernobyl or 9/11 attack at a nuclear plant to harm the local population. Nuclear reactors routinely emit some radioactivity directly into the air and water. It enters the body through breathing and the food chain, where it attacks healthy cells. Radioactivity is especially harmful to the fetus, infant and child. There are over 100 chemicals not found in nature, but produced only in atomic bomb explosions and nuclear reactor operations. Each affects the body in a different way. Strontium-90 attaches to bone and penetrates into the bone marrow. Iodine-131 seeks out the thyroid gland. Cesium-137 disperses throughout the soft tissues. Some decay quickly, while others remain in the body for years. Virtually all 85,000 residents of Callaway, Gasconade, Montgomery, and Osage counties live within 20 miles of the Callaway plant. In the early 1980s, the local cancer death rate was 15 percent below the U.S. rate. But it has risen steadily since, and now is 8 percent above the U.S. The increase has been most rapid for children and young adults (up 50 percent), who are more likely to suffer the effects of radiation exposure. These patterns are unusual in an area with no obvious cancer risk. While many factors can contribute to local cancer risk, radioactive emissions should be considered one of them. The decision to build a new reactor should wait until a full examination of potential health hazards can be made. Until then, a safer and more prudent approach to the growing electricity needs would be through more efficient products and safe, renewable sources such as solar and wind power. Joseph J. Mangano, MPH, MBA, is executive director of the Radiation and Public Health Project, a nonprofit health research group based in New York. ***************************************************************** 10 baltimoresun.com: Nuclear revival a mix of hope and fear Andrew Leckey -- Taking Stock September 23, 2007 For a decade, Dorthe Matowitz worked as a piping inspector at nuclear power plants, but tired of all the travel and switched occupations three years ago. She is now in demand by a revitalized nuclear power industry scrambling for skilled help. "They've called to tell me that many of their inspectors are nearing retirement or are still trainees," she said. "Good inspectors are needed because business is booming." Baltimore's Constellation Energy Group is among those leading the industry's revival with plans to build the nation's first new nuclear reactor adjacent to its existing Calvert Cliffs plant. A handful of other large companies have proposed dozens of new reactors nationwide, though some question how many will actually be built. Many investors are divided over the future of the industry. For older Americans, the word "nuclear" conjures up memories of grade-school drills to prepare for a Soviet attack. Later, the Three Mile Island situation, Chernobyl radiation and The China Syndrome movie underscored why nuclear reactors were shuttered or moratoriums declared in the 1970s and 1980s. Construction cost overruns and delays made matters worse. Since Sept. 11, 2001, plant security and the trustworthiness of some nations to handle nuclear material are big issues. So is nuclear waste disposal. The ever-hopeful side of the equation is that nuclear plants account for 20 percent of the U.S. electricity supply, and nearly three-fourths of all the electricity generation that emits no air pollutants or greenhouse gases. Coal-fired plants are major global-warming suspects, while wind turbines and solar panels have a way to go to become major sources of clean power. The move to new energy sources and away from fossil fuels revived nuclear power. A streamlined Nuclear Regulatory Commission permit process, government subsidies and advanced construction methods helped. And businesses see money in nuclear power: • International Business Machines Corp. established a Global Center of Excellence for Nuclear Power in France to support "safe, reliable and efficient electricity generation." • GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy signed an agreement with Entergy Nuclear to develop and provide components for nuclear plants for Mississippi and Louisiana. • Westinghouse Electric Co. and a partner received multibillion-dollar contracts with China for four nuclear power plants there. Russia is building a fleet of ships equipped with nuclear reactors and has a $60 billion land-based nuclear program. Vietnam and Thailand recently announced plans to build plants. Twenty countries are considering initiation or expansion of nuclear power generation. In the U.S., the NRC expects a dozen applications for reactors this year. Earlier this year, Constellation submitted the first partial application the agency has seen in 30 years. More than 440 nuclear reactors exist in 38 countries. Stocks of companies such as Constellation Energy, General Electric Co., Entergy Corp., Exelon Corp. and Dominion Resources Inc. that aggressively embrace nuclear power receive the most attention, but this growing industry will encompass many firms. For investors, the balancing act between hopes and fears will begin in earnest. yourmoney@tribune.com Andrew Leckey writes for Tribune Media Services. ***************************************************************** 11 Salt Lake Tribune: Boosters say N-power not doomed in long term The Salt Lake Tribune Article Last Updated: 09/22/2007 02:20:08 AM MDT Legislators seeking to sow the seeds of nuclear power in Utah say Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s near-term opposition to building reactors doesn't doom the issue in the upcoming legislative session. Huntsman will oppose efforts to build nuclear reactors in Utah until technology is developed allowing the waste to be processed at the plant and reused, his spokeswoman says. "The governor supports nuclear power as part of the entire energy mix that is necessary to power our economy in the future," said Huntsman's spokeswoman, Lisa Roskelley. "In terms of nuclear power plants in Utah, he wants there to be an on-site processing of the nuclear waste that is produced. But nuclear power is an important part of the energy mix." On-site reprocessing is far off on the horizon. Currently, there is no facility in the United States that can process its nuclear fuel to separate the usable components from the dangerous, radioactive byproducts. The Bush administration supports developing reprocessing technology, but any plan would involve a centralized facility where waste could be shipped. The governor's reservations show the issue of how to deal with nuclear waste remains paramount, after the state spent a decade fighting plans by Private Fuel Storage, a utility consortium, to store spent nuclear fuel on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation. There are no commercial nuclear reactors in Utah. Rep. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, a Utah legislator leading a movement to offer financial incentives to companies that would build a nuclear reactor in the state, says he expects the proposal will get an airing in the upcoming session, despite Huntsman's reluctance. "The Legislature has a very supportive position on nuclear power, and if the governor understands the issue thoroughly, he'll probably take a more moderate position on nuclear power," Tilton said. "I think the governor would do well to explore it a little bit more from the other side." The Legislature's Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee met Wednesday to hear information on a proposal to shelter utility companies from financial risks if they build a nuclear reactor in the state. Committee members said they wanted more information on the potential costs of nuclear power. Roskelley said the governor agrees that the issue needs to be studied further. He hasn't taken a position on the proposed legislation, since it is still being drafted. Vanessa Pierce, executive director of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said that promises of nuclear power break down when the economics are considered. "Money speaks louder than anything, and if you look at the history of nuclear power and the present experience that other countries are having with nuclear reactors, nuclear doesn't add up," she said. "There are huge cost overruns consistently, and if [Tilton] and [Rep.] Mike Noel think they should be gambling with ratepayer dollars to invest in these risky technologies, they should think again." "The Legislature has a very supportive position on nuclear power, and if the governor understands the issue thoroughly, he'll probably take a more moderate position on nuclear power." AARON TILTON R-Springville ***************************************************************** 12 Brattleboro Reformer: Vt. lawmakers' letter calls nuclear plant's safety into question BRATTLEBORO, VT By PAUL H. HEINTZ, Reformer Staff Saturday, September 22 BRATTLEBORO -- Vermont's Congressional delegation sent a letter containing a series of in-depth questions to Entergy CEO Wayne Leonard Friday regarding recent safety concerns at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. "We are seriously troubled by the events that occurred at the Vermont Yankee power plant," wrote Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Sen. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt. "Our constituents are understandably alarmed, and have raised numerous concerns about the 35-year old plant." Read the letter In the letter, the congressmen ask Leonard to provide written responses to 26 questions grouped in 11 categories, relating to the plant's infrastructure, safety procedures and inspection history. The letter comes four weeks after one of 22 cooling tower cells collapsed, causing the plant to reduce its capacity to 50 percent. A later incident involving a steam turbine valve caused the plant to temporarily shut down completely. The congressmen refer in the letter to a "red memo," which was sent by general manager of plant operations Bill Maguire to VY personnel Aug. 28. Maguire states in the memo that inspections were performed on top of the cooling tower the day before it collapsed, and that "personnel performing these inspections had a near miss of serious injury." Under the heading "What went wrong?" Maguire writes, "The potential risk for serious injury was not sufficiently evaluated to address the worst case scenario prior to performing inspections." In their letter, the congressmen write, "The personnel were walking on top of the cell which later collapsed. Since safety is your #1 priority, as mentioned in the memo, what procedure should Vermont Yankee have followed to make sure that all personnel were safe and why was that procedure not followed?" Friday's letter is the latest in a series of steps taken by the delegation since the problems came to light. The members released a joint statement days after the incident expressing concern about the situation, and Welch later introduced legislation in the House that would allow states to request Independent Safety Evaluations of nuclear plants. That bill mirrored one filed by Sanders in the Senate prior to the incident. According to Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs and Welch spokesman Andrew Savage, the congressmen's staff members have taken part in a series of teleconferences and video-conferences with Entergy personnel to clarify the situation. Entergy spokesman Rob Williams said Leonard had received the letter and will be responding to it "as soon as possible." "We've made every effort to be open on this and look forward to sharing further information with the delegation," he said. Paul Heintz can be reached at pheintz@reformer.com or 802-254-2311, ext. 275. ***************************************************************** 13 Salt Lake Tribune: Lawmakers will push for nuclear power despite governor's opposition Article Last Updated: 09/21/2007 09:43:35 PM MDT Posted: 9:34 PM- Legislators seeking to sow the seeds of nuclear power in Utah say Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s near-term opposition to building reactors doesn't doom the issue in the upcoming legislative session. Huntsman will oppose efforts to build nuclear reactors in Utah until technology is developed allowing the waste to be processed at the plant and re-used, his spokeswoman says. "The governor supports nuclear power as part of the entire energy mix that is necessary to power our economy in the future," said Huntsman's spokeswoman, Lisa Roskelley. "In terms of nuclear power plants in Utah, he wants there to be an on-site processing of the nuclear waste that is produced. But nuclear power is an important part of the energy mix." On-site reprocessing is far off on the horizon. Currently, there is no facility in the United States that can process its nuclear fuel to separate the usable components from the dangerous, radioactive by-products. The Bush administration supports developing reprocessing technology, but any plan would involve a centralized facility where waste could be shipped. The governor's reservations show the issue of how to deal with nuclear waste remains paramount after the state spent a decade fighting plans by Private Fuel Storage, a utility consortium, to store spent nuclear fuel on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation. There are no commercial nuclear reactors in Utah. Rep. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, a Utah legislator leading a movement to offer financial incentives to companies that would build a nuclear reactor in the state, says he expects the proposal will get an airing in the upcoming session, despite Huntsman's reluctance. "The Legislature has a very supportive position on nuclear power, and if the governor understands the issue thoroughly, he'll probably take a more moderate position on nuclear power," Tilton said. "I think the governor would do well to explore it a little bit more from the other side." The Legislature's Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee met Wednesday to hear information on a proposal to shelter utility companies from financial risks if they build a nuclear reactor in the state. Committee members said they wanted more information on the potential costs of nuclear power. Roskelley said the governor agrees that the issue needs to be studied further. He hasn't taken a position on the proposed legislation, since it is still being drafted. Vanessa Pierce, executive director of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said that promises of nuclear power break down when the economics are considered. "Money speaks louder than anything, and if you look at the history of nuclear power and the present experience that other countries are having with nuclear reactors, nuclear doesn't add up," she said. "There are huge cost overruns consistently and if [Tilton] and [Rep.] Mike Noel think they should be gambling with ratepayer dollars to invest in these risky technologies, they should think again." ***************************************************************** 14 Salt Lake Tribune: Nuclear power ready to rally The Associated Press Article Last Updated: 09/22/2007 12:49:36 PM MDT A Grand Gulf Nuclear Station cooling tower in Mississippi. NEW YORK - The current turmoil in credit markets is unlikely to derail plans by power companies to begin ordering the first new nuclear plants since cost overruns and public opposition virtually killed the industry three decades ago. Nearly 30 years after Three Mile Island, Entergy Corp., Dominion Resources Inc., Exelon Corp. and the Tennessee Valley Authority are expected to be among the first to seek regulatory approval to build new plants. Constellation Energy Group has already filed a partial application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which expects up to seven requests this year and 28 by 2009. The first plants could be online by 2014 or 2015. ''Investors are relatively positive on companies that are . . . planning the next round of nuclear plants,'' said Barry Abramson, analyst and portfolio manager at GAMCO Investors Inc., in Rye, N.Y. ''The numbers seem to work.'' Utilities see in nuclear plants an opportunity to affordably meet demand for electricity, which the Energy Information Administration is forecasting will grow by 42 percent by 2030. High natural gas prices and the prospect of taxes or constraints on greenhouse gases are making gas- or coal-fired plants less attractive. New modular designs and a streamlined regulatory process further strengthen the argument for nuclear power. ''At the end of the day, we believe . . . nuclear will be cost-competitive,'' said Randy Hutchinson, senior vice president of nuclear business development at New Orleans-based Entergy. But this nuclear renaissance faces challenges. No company has lined up financing, and their ability to borrow affordably will depend on federal loan guarantees and state rules about when utilities can hike rates to pay for construction. Construction costs are rising because of growing global demand for raw materials. And activism, an accident or a terrorist attack could stoke public opposition. Still, reactor vendors, such as General Electric Co., Toshiba Corp.-owned Westinghouse Electric Co. and France's Areva Group, in a new joint venture with Constellation, are positioning themselves to profit. G.E., in joint venture with Japan's Hitachi Ltd., sees its annual reactor business growing from $1.1 billion to $8 billion over the next decade. To strengthen its hand, the industry is pushing legislation to expand federal loan guarantees, available for 80 percent of plant costs. Utilities are also lobbying state lawmakers to let them raise rates to recover construction costs. Florida and Louisiana, for example, have passed such measures. State officials are reluctant. ''I just don't want to . . . give them a blank check and say, build a plant and we can talk about the cost later,'' said Nielsen Cochran, chairman of the Mississippi Public Service Commission. Some states are allowing such rules subject to ''prudence reviews,'' said Diane Munns, executive director of the Edison Electric Institute's retail energy services group. The Energy Department is also helping, paying half the cost of three early applications, including $5.5 million of the $11 million Entergy has spent so far preparing an application for a new reactor in Port Gibson, Miss., site of its existing Grand Gulf plant. G.E. has received $46 million in incentives since 2004, and expects a total of $250 million by 2010. Experts doubt the current credit market dislocations will affect nuclear plant financing. Lenders will view reactors as safe and desirable investments because of the federal guarantees and state cost recovery rules, and because they'll be built by established utilities with long track records of operating power plants. Most utilities will invest some of their own equity in the projects, and many will finance the plants on their balance sheets - paying for them out of cash flows and borrowings not tied directly to any one project. ''I would argue that you're investing in an entire company,'' said Standard & Poor's analyst Dimitri Nikas. ''The issue will not be tied to a specific asset.'' Nuclear plants still use low-grade nuclear reactions to generate heat and create steam or pressurized water to spin turbines. But instead of the one-of-a-kind designs the new plants will use interchangeable modular designs. Gravity, instead of pumps, will move water in an emergency and new alloys and digital controls will also improve operations and safety. The 1979 accident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island plant began when cooling system pumps and valves failed. The NRC has already approved two Westinghouse designs. One G.E.-Hitachi design has been approved, another is pending. Areva plans to submit a design for approval soon. Nuclear plants cost more than conventional plants but are cheaper to operate. A new 1,000-megawatt reactor would cost $2.1 billion in 2006 dollars, compared with $1.3 billion and $600 million, respectively, for comparable coal and natural-gas plants, according to EIA estimates. But the average cost of nuclear-produced electricity was 1.72 cents per kilowatt hour in 2005, versus 2.21 cents for coal-fired plants and 7.51 cents for natural gas plants, says the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group. Weighing in nuclear power's favor is utilities' belief that the government will constrain or tax greenhouse gases, which would significantly increase operating costs at conventional plants. Nuclear plants emit greenhouse gasses, but far less than conventional plants. Critics say the industry is overstating the new plants' advantages, and ignoring the unresolved issue of spent nuclear fuel. ''There clearly are some benefits to relying on gravity over electric motors and pumps,'' said Paul Gunter, director of the reactor watchdog project at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, which opposes nuclear power plants. ''But there are no guarantees that terrorism or an accident won't penetrate one of these new designs.'' Radioactive water leaked into the Sea of Japan from buildings housing reactors built to one of G.E.'s newer designs after July's magnitude 6.8 earthquake struck Japan's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant. Community opposition could stop projects. Steel parts could cause another potential bottleneck: Most necessary large forgings can only be made at Japan Steel Works, which can supply only 7 to 8 plants a year, Hutchinson said. Still, GAMCO's Abramson says investors are comfortable the industry and NRC have addressed the problems that caused cost overruns last time. ''I think investors know that you can't find anything with zero risk,'' he said. In Utah Lawmakers last week slowed the rush toward Utah's first nuclear power plant. The Interim Public Utilities and Technology Committee backed off a proposal to cut the financial risks faced by a utility company building a nuclear reactor. Instead, committee members want to study the costs ratepayers might have to bear if a proposal went forward and how those costs might compare with development of other energy sources. Committee members heard two energy industry experts say that no new nuclear plants have been built for more than two decades; not because of environmental problems but because reactors are financially risky. ***************************************************************** 15 Salt Lake Tribune: No nukes: Nuclear power plant plans should be shelved Tribune Editorial Article Last Updated: 09/23/2007 01:06:29 PM MDT Utah dodged a nuclear catastrophe last week. State lawmakers pulled the plug, hopefully forever, on plans that would make it easier to build a nuclear power plant in Utah. It wasn't the threat of nuclear disaster - a meltdown or a terrorist attack - that made lawmakers pull back. And it wasn't the lack of a permanent nuclear waste depository - nuclear power plants have been storing spent fuel on-site for decades. Nor was it the threat of environmental damage from uranium mining, or Gov. Jon Huntsman's opposition, or the acknowledgement that nuclear plants take a decade or more to build. No, it was the staggering cost of nuclear energy - up to $2 billion to bring a new plant online - and the potential impact on your pocketbook that brought the Legislature's Interim Public Utilities and Technology Committee to its senses Wednesday. At least temporarily. The committee was considering legislation based on a Florida law that allows utilities to recover the cost of nuclear plant construction from ratepayers years before a plant becomes operational. Even, in some cases, if the plant fails to become operational. Legislators had hoped to reduce the financial risk for utilities and their investors, thus creating incentives for nuclear plant construction. But energy industry experts told the panel that nuclear power is not the panacea for our long-term energy needs. Demand for electricity is increasing by about 3 percent per year in Utah, which depends largely on coal for power, a fossil fuel that rapidly is falling out of favor due to its enormous contribution to the greenhouse gases that warm the globe. Labor-intensive nuke plants are also expensive to operate. And that translates to high energy costs for consumers. Construction and operation costs are the primary reasons, the experts testified, that there hasn't been a new nuclear power plant built in the U.S. in more than 20 years. The committee responded by requesting a study that compares the cost to consumers of various alternative energy options, including nuclear power. And the proposed bill was, thankfully, set aside. While awaiting the results of the study, lawmakers need to explore all of the ramifications of nuclear power, not just the economic ones. The blunt truth is that an accident could kill thousands of people, something that could never happen at a solar, wind or geothermal power plant. ***************************************************************** 16 The Hindu: Nuke pact a pretext to exert political pressure on India - Raja Saturday, September 22, 2007 : 2115 Hrs Regional Tiruchirappalli (TN), Sept. 22 (PTI): The Indo-US nuclear pact was not just confined to nuclear cooperation, instead in its pretext, the United States was trying to exert political pressure upon India, CPI National Secretary D Raja said today. "In the guise of making India a partner country, it was actually trying to establish a military alliance in South Asia," he said. This was part of the US' global strategy, Raja said. He came down heavily on the US bureaucrats who had asked India to come out clean on Iran issue. Raja, however, expressed hope that the UPA government would not go ahead with the deal after the UPA-Left Committee's next round of talks slated for next week. He alleged that the BJP had marred the discussions in the Lok Sabha on the issue and termed the development as 'unfortunate' and 'condemnable'. He accused the saffron party of converting mythological references into history and said that the Sethusamudram project should not be made a religious issue. Raja said CPI would take up the issue of price rise of essential commodities and inflation and would organise nation-wide campaigns from October 1-10. It would hold demonstrations, protests and seminars asking the UPA government to implement the Common Minimum Programme strictly. Reacting to BJP leader L K Advani's recent announcement that it was time for mid-term polls, he said it was his 'individual perception' and not of the Leftists. Copyright © 2007, The Hindu ***************************************************************** 17 Salt Lake Tribune: Radioactive mind control Editorials Public Forum Letter Article Last Updated: 09/22/2007 01:08:51 PM MDT Thanks to two strangers who rode into town and stopped a stampede. Utahns were about to be rushed into a dark future by committing to build a nuclear power plant (Tribune, Sept. 20). Utah's legislative interim Public Utilities and Technology Committee heard tempering facts (cost overruns, waste storage, accidents and terrorism) from two energy industry experts who are knowledgeable and experienced in the world of nuclear power. The panel has been forewarned to "stop, look and listen" before committing Utah to the energy/utility industry's mind control. Rosemary A. Holt Salt Lake City ***************************************************************** 18 Press TV: US, Canada to build N-reactor for Yemen Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:38:15 Source: AFP Yemen will hold talks with US and Canadian firms on funding the construction of a nuclear reactor in the Arabian Peninsula country. Energy and Electricity Minister Mustafa Bahran said on Saturday that the negotiations, to be held in Sanaa next week, are aimed at reaching "a final agreement" on launching a project to produce 5,000 megawatts of electricity and desalinate seawater. President Ali Abdullah Saleh said last October that Yemen plans to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes with assistance from the US and Canada. Bahran said last month that international companies would build the reactor to ensure the long-term energy security of Yemen. Bahran, who spoke after returning from the general conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, said he had informed IAEA Chief Mohamed ElBaradei of Yemen's talks with the companies. MMA/MMA © Press TV 2007. All rights reserved. Our privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 19 AFP: Nuclear energy to be key in low-carbon energy policy - Brussels - Fri Sep 21, 4:13 PM ET BRUSSELS (AFP) - Nuclear power will remain a key element as the world seeks to move toward low carbon energy, the European Commission said Friday, announcing a new forum for nuclear energy research. The Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform will bring together industry and researchers to draw up a strategy "to prepare for the future and maintain European leadership in this sector," the EU's executive arm said in a statement. "Energy consumption worldwide is likely to double between 2000 and 2050, and nuclear energy will remain a key element in future low-carbon energy systems," it added. "Europe has the largest nuclear industry in the world and one third of its electricity comes from nuclear plants." European Science and Research Commissioner Janez Potocnik said that "for those countries that choose it," nuclear power will be "a very important part of their solution to security of supply and reduction of greenhouse gases". She stressed that two major political and public concerns must be addressed to make this possible. The first is ensuring that nuclear power is economically competitive. The second "more importantly" is to make nuclear power "as neutral as possible in environmental terms and in terms of the legacy we leave future generations," she said, a reference to nuclear waste. Potocnik said the answer to both concerns lies in research and innovation including on "a significant reduction in nuclear waste as well as sound ways of recycling or storing it". When questioned about Potocnik's comments her spokesman took pains to stress that the choice of using nuclear energy remained one for individual EU member states. Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 20 Daily Herald: No nuke plant in Utah for now Saturday, September 22, 2007 The Associated Press SALT LAKE CITY -- Gov. Jon Huntsman opposes a nuclear-power plant in Utah until there's technology to safely handle radioactive waste on site. "That's a deal-breaker," Huntsman told the Deseret Morning News. Huntsman recently led Utah's fight to stop a stockpile for tons of spent fuel rods at a Goshute Indian reservation, about 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. A new issue has emerged: State lawmakers are talking about allowing utilities to bill consumers for the cost of building a nuclear-power facility even before it begins generating electricity. Huntsman said he's worried about a nuclear accident. "This is a long-term proposal at best, I think, because you've got to look at the risk involved, and there is enormous risk potential," he said. The chairman of the Legislature's Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee said the discussion has just started. "The only way we can meet our needs is through nuclear power," said Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, who calls the amount of waste "minuscule." Critics of nuclear power praised Huntsman. He "wisely understands that building a nuclear reactor here is inconsistent with state policy and jeopardizes the successes that we've had in preventing other states from dumping their waste here," said Vanessa Pearce, executive director of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, known as HEAL Utah. Huntsman did not rule out nuclear power as an option to meet the state's long-term energy needs. He described it as part of a mix of useful energy sources, including wind, solar and cleaner coal-fired plants. "You have to consider all the options out there, including nuclear," he said, endorsing the recent recommendation of his own task force on climate change. "It's only realistic if you want to look at it as a hardheaded realist over the next generation or two." But until nuclear waste can be recycled and rendered safe where it's produced, Huntsman said he's not ready to back a plant in Utah. This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A1. Copyright © 2007 Daily Herald and Lee Enterprises | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 21 IAEA: Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities IAEA Launches New International Initiative Staff Report 21 September 2007 Cover of a brochure distributed during the launch of the International Decommissioning Network (IDN) initiative at the 51st IAEA General Conference. The IAEA 51st General Conference was the setting for the launch of a new international initiative aimed at bolstering cooperation between organizations involved in the decommissioning of nuclear installations. Called the International Decommissioning Network (IDN), the initiative will act as a conduit for the flow of skills and information from those Member States with proven decommissioning expertise to those facing the challenge for the first time or whose programmes are constrained by lack of resources. Around the world more than 350 nuclear installations - including research and medical as well as power reactors - are ageing and approaching the end of their operational life-span. Some have already been shut down and await the complicated and costly task of decommissioning, a process by which facilities are cleared of industrial and radioactive contamination so that they may safely be used for other purposes. "Many of these facilities are small and widely distributed geographically," says Paul Dinner of the IAEA´s Waste Technology Section. "In most developing Member States, decommissioning strategies need to be tailored to cope with limited experience, infrastructure and funding." The establishment of the IDN stemmed from the recommendations of a December 2006 IAEA International Conference in Athens, Greece, and builds on experience gained from the successful Network of Centres of Excellence for training and development in waste disposal technologies, formed in 2001. A collaborative initiative between the IAEA´s departments of Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Safety and Security, and Technical Cooperation, the IDN will be open to all Members States, and be of specific interest to those engaged in, or actively planning, decommissioning. A number of Member States with mature decommissioning programmes have already expressed interest in sharing their knowledge with less advanced countries. In some cases, facilities undergoing decommissioning will serve as demonstration models for on-site training. Initially, the IDN will focus on facilities such as research reactors where the needs are judged to be substantial and where an impact can be made within a reasonable timescale. "The Network also has the potential to help Member States enhance their overall technical practices and management skills. This is likely to be very helpful to those seeking to expand their range of atomic energy applications," says Paul Dinner. In summary, the International Decommissioning Network will: * Promote the sharing of practical and effective decommissioning experience; * Leverage IAEA decommissioning support activities to all interested parties; and * Lead to the safe, economic and timely dismantlement of disused nuclear facilities. A technical meeting, to be held at the IAEA on 29-31 October, will finalize details and establish the 2008/2009 programme of work for the IDN. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: ***************************************************************** 22 Amarillo.com: Rick Perry: Let's seek new ways to keep the lights on Opinion: Column - Energy Future 09/23/07 AUSTIN - What is the best new energy source to supplement natural gas and oil in the 21st century? We don't know for sure, but as a national leader in renewable energy, Texas is working hard to find out. Building on a strong history of energy production, companies and agencies across our state are taking cues from America's most daring inventors to find the next sources of energy to help power our great state, and our great nation. The captains of American industry move great ideas from concept to production. Thomas Edison perfected the light bulb in the 19th century. In the 20th century, Henry Ford made cars more affordable with his innovations in production processes. And in our lifetime, NASA engineers sent men to the moon. The next frontier is energy. In this century, we will move new energy technology from the laboratory to the electrical wall socket and the interstate highway. There is no question that the demand for energy in our state is escalating. Texas is attracting new business and citizens daily. In fact, our population is expected to double in the next 30 years. We cannot afford to replicate the rolling blackouts experienced on the West Coast that might leave business, industry and our citizens without power. One thousand newcomers make Texas their new home every day, meaning we will need to increase electricity generation nearly 50 percent by 2030. To keep pace with the growing demand, we must diversify our energy sources. This diversity will enable us to manage emissions and provide adequate power for our state. Today, residential electric customers can benefit from market competition by visiting www.PowerToChoose.com and choosing which electricity company will get their energy dollar. Fossil fuels remain essential to our energy profile, but they should be supplemented by wind, water, solar, biomass and nuclear energy. A balanced portfolio will provide energy stability and a prosperous Texas economy in the decades to come. We already have surpassed California as the nation's leading producer of wind energy. Our energy dollars and unique environment will continue to lure "clean" energy companies and energy pioneers to Texas. West Texas, with its ample share of wind and sunshine, is drawing the attention of innovators, including the Solar Summit that was held in El Paso last August. The bioenergy business is taking off across the country. While some states look to corn-based ethanol as a biofuel solution, that approach has negative effects on Texas food producers. Instead, we should focus our efforts on the energy potential in non-food crops. I recently awarded a $5 million grant through the Texas Emerging Technology Fund to underwrite efforts at Texas A & M University to create clean and efficient bioenergy sources. Advances in technology also have made nuclear power safer and cleaner. Our state is currently home to four nuclear generation facilities, but more are needed to help satisfy our growing energy needs. Nuclear energy is relatively inexpensive to operate, but plants are expensive and can take more than a decade to build and bring onto the grid. We must be careful not to increase those costs with needless regulation. Exelon Nuclear, Amarillo Power, TXU and NRG Energy are exploring the notion of bringing new nuclear generation capabilities to Texas, and I hope they succeed. If all goes well, Exelon, TXU and NRG could be generating additional power by 2015. I also believe coal must play a role in our future energy portfolio, generating power as cleanly as technology will allow. Coal plants are the leading source of energy in the United States. And they are becoming cleaner. Texas is aggressively bidding to host FutureGen, the world's first clean coal project. We have put our money where our mouth is with an offer of $240 million in franchise tax credits. We want this plant in Texas. When God gave mankind dominion over the Earth, we all became its stewards. That is why Texas will continue to pioneer innovative technologies while balancing the use of traditional energy sources to boost our state's economy. Ours is a beautiful state with a strong work force and energy innovators who will continue working to keep the lights on in Texas. Rick Perry is governor of the state of Texas. Copyright 2007 Amarillo Globe-News & Amarillo.com ***************************************************************** 23 Guardian Unlimited: Why we need our own nuclear power | Comment | Wind and wave power are not yet developed enough to keep all the country's kettles boiling Robin McKie Sunday September 23, 2007 There are two intriguing prints hanging in Jim McDonald's office: a poster for Pompeii and a watercolour of Torness power station. Artistically, there is not much to connect a Roman amphitheatre with a nuclear reactor. Yet the pairing has significance, especially for McDonald, director of Strathclyde University's centre for energy and the environment. As he points out, Torness may soon be relegated to a footnote, like Pompeii, in our history books. Certainly, Alex Salmond has made it clear he wants Torness to be Scotland's last nuclear reactor and has pledged to block planning permission for replacement plants both for Torness (to be decommissioned in 15 to 20 years) and its sister station at Hunterston (to be closed in five to 10 years). Scotland will then join a special European non-nuclear elite, along with Portugal, Italy and one or two other smaller states. For greenies, it would be a dream come true. I am not convinced, however, and neither is McDonald. 'Scotland requires about 5.5 to 6 gigawatts of electricity to keep its offices running, its homes warm and its factories working,' he points out. 'We can now generate almost 10 gigawatts and export the excess to England. With no replacements for Hunterston and Torness, that will stop. Nuclear power now provides 40 per cent of our power baseload. Without it, we would end up importing power and I don't see how a country seeking full autonomy can justify that.' Indeed, if the rest of Britain decides, as expected, to replace its ageing atom plants with new ones - unlike Scotland - much of the electricity pumped north to fill the nation's power vacuum would be nuclear. Morally and economically, Scotland would be on dodgy ground. So are our leaders really sure we can make it as an industrial power without nuclear energy? Can we definitely rely only on renewables to ensure our industrial strength? A brief glance at the options is illuminating. Our hydro-electric power capacity is near its limit, while wave and tidal energy technology, although of considerable promise, is in its infancy. That leaves us with wind, a source of immense potential but, like nuclear, bedevilled by committed opposition. The sight of huge turbines swirling on our hills drives walkers, landowners and activists into lathers of apoplexy. Some authorities, such as Perth and Kinross council, have reacted simply by blocking all wind farm applications. Others, such as the Highland council, have granted some, but not all. And then there is the grid. Like an ageing tenement flat, Scotland needs rewiring. If it hopes to ship electricity from wind - and one day wave - plants from the north to the populous south, new transmission lines will be needed. But a plan by power companies to upgrade the key electricity link, already close to capacity, that runs down Scotland's spine from Beauly to Denny is stalled by a public inquiry. Opponents are dismayed by the proposal to built 600 towers, each 213ft high, over prime Caledonian estate - including Ardverikie, where the BBC's Monarch of the Glen series was filmed. But if the Beauly-Denny upgrade is rejected, the consequences would be disastrous, says Jason Ormiston, chief executive of Scottish Renewables. 'There are 60 wind farms planned for the north that can only work if there is an upgraded line to carry their electricity.' Wind power is also an intermittent energy source. Sometimes cold, still Arctic air grips the nation and turbines stop. Scots rushing home to switch on kettles and central heating would therefore be disappointed with a future dominated by wind power. Which leaves us with coal, gas and oil. All are major carbon-emitters. Yet Scotland is pledged to reduce its carbon output by 80 per cent while electricity demand continues to rise at a steady 1 per cent a year. It is hard to see how to reconcile these factors with a non-nuclear future, as McDonald stresses: 'Two years ago, the Torness nuclear plant was closed for several months for repair. Nearby coal-burning Longannet took up the slack. The result was a massive jump in Scotland's carbon output.' Admittedly, there are some useful technologies being developed to help coal and gas plants reduce emissions- carbon capture and storage, for example - but again too many schemes are in the doldrums. For example, a prime opportunity to use the North Sea's depleted Miller oil field to store carbon dioxide, extracted from power plant emissions, appears to have been lost thanks to Whitehall prevarication. And that takes us back to nuclear reactors, an industry equally beset with problems. It has an appalling record for cost overruns, for example, while the fact that the issue of nuclear waste disposal is only now being dealt with, after 40 years' dithering, is a UK disgrace. It is not surprising then that the idea of new atom plants dismays so many activists and politicians, though a little caution is required. Consider Italy. After Chernobyl, it voted to shut all its reactors. As a result, Italy now has to import most of its electricity from Europe (a sizable chunk from French nuclear reactors) and has to pay more for its power than other European nations. Not a role model to be envied, I would argue. More to the point, new nuclear reactors, based on French or US designs, are now cheaper, safer and more reliable than current atom plants. 'It is a tested technology today which is not yet the case for carbon sequestration, wave power or tidal energy,' says McDonald. 'We need a couple of new reactors to replace our old ones and help keep ourselves going while we develop renewable sources to their full potential.' It is a good point. Nuclear power is not an alternative to renewables, but part of an energy mix in which fossil fuels should be used less while carbon storage is encouraged and wave and tidal power promoted and developed. Atom plants may be a financial risk, but a future without them is an even bigger gamble. · Ruaridh Nicoll is away Email your comments for publication to: politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk ***************************************************************** 24 TheDay.com: No Need For New Nukes In State By Michael Steinberg Published on 9/23/2007 Buy Photo By Sean D. Elliot Dominion Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Waterford. This is in regards to your editorial “Time to consider nuclear,” printed Sept. 4. New nukes in Connecticut? Hardly worth considering. Why? Because what building new nuclear plants is really about is picking our pockets to further line the pockets of wealthy utility executives and shareholders. Dominion and other nuclear-minded utilities don't want to cough up most of the money needed to invest in new nukes. And reasonable investors don't want to make highly risky multi-billion dollar loans to the likes of Dominion. Not unless, that is, the federal government (i.e. taxpayers) guarantees the loans. And that's exactly what the nuclear industry and potential investors are demanding. According to a July 9 report by Bloomberg.com, last March representatives of five major banks — Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Leman Brothers and Morgan Stanley — informed Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman that they wouldn't loan money for new nukes unless the feds bumped up loan guarantees from 72 percent to 80 percent. Currently pending in Congress is a measure slipped into this year's energy bill that would guarantee loans of $50 billion to build new nukes over the next two years. Risk of default Consumer group Public Citizen stated earlier this year, “According to a May 2003 Congressional Budget Office report, the risk of default on loan guarantees for new nuclear plants is 'very high — well above 50 percent.' ” Meanwhile new nuke utilities are lobbying states where they want to build new power reactors to make customers start paying for them already. So in reality new nukers want taxpayers and ratepayers to shell out megabucks to build their private nuclear enterprises. Lets not forget that, besides the impact of the disasters at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, construction of new nuclear plants in the U.S. slowed to a halt because of outrageous delays and cost overruns. Millstone 3 is one of the worst examples of this. The NRC granted its construction permit in 1974. It was supposed to be completed in 1978 at a cost of $400 million. Instead it wasn't finished until 1986, costing $3.8 billion. Today's new nukes advocates tell us each reactor will cost $4billion to $5 billion. Imagine what the real final cost might end up. To see the real cost of Connecticut's heavy dependence on nuclear power, just look at your latest electric bill. Remember, nuclear power was originally peddled as “too cheap to meter.” In recent years, the longtime and nationally-renowned business Franklin Mushroom Farm left the state because of the cost of electricity, the highest in the nation. Clearly Connecticut can't afford this kind of nuclear future. As for the superiority of the proposed “new generation” of nuclear power reactors, witness the seven idled reactors rocked out of operation by a massive earthquake this summer at the Kashwazaki Kariwa nuclear power station in Japan — the world's largest nuclear power station. The two newest reactors among them are new generation Advanced Boiling Water Reactors. New nukes would also generate more massive amounts of radioactive waste that has nowhere to go; continue to pollute our air, water and food; increase our risk of cancer and other diseases; and remain vulnerable to catastrophic accidents and attacks. In the U.S. the whole new nukes “renaissance” emerged from the still secret deliberations of Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force, in the early days of the Bush administration. Out of this came Bush's Nuclear Power 2010 Program, which has been providing half the cost of new nukes' license applications and other related permits. Today in Connecticut this nonsense is being pitched by Rob Simmons, who was tossed out of office by the voters because of his support for the current administration's ill advised follies and misadventures. Meet the new nukes. Same as the old nukes. Don't get fooled again. Michael Steinberg is a Niantic native and author of “Millstone and Me: Sex, Lies and Radiation in Southeastern Connecticut.” He now lives in Willimantic. Regional Privacy Policy | Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | © 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. 101 ***************************************************************** 25 Hindustan Times: Yes to N-power, no to 123 Sutirtho Patranobis , Hindustan Times New Delhi, September 23, 2007 The Left is for indigenous nuclear power but the India-US civilian nuclear deal would undermine India’s homegrown nuclear programme, CPM general secretary Prakash Karat said in the Capital on Saturday. Talking in context of the controversy generated by West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee’s and party patriarch Jyoti Basu’s recent remarks that nuclear power is good for India, Karat unequivocally said the CPM is in favour of nuclear power. “`We are for nuclear power. People oppose it. There are opposing views within the party as well. We respect their views. But we had discussions within the party. We will have a nuclear power plant (in west Bengal),’’ the CPM general secretary said. Karat added that it was being wrongly projected that the West Bengal leadership has differences with the central leadership on the nuclear deal. He said that both Bhattacharjee and Basu had spoken on nuclear power but not on the deal. The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), a public sector company, would develop the planned nuclear power plant in West Bengal. The cost of the power generated from the plant would be cheap, as indigenous technology would be used. But Karat said that if the government operationalises the India-US nuclear deal, it would undermine the country’s indigenous three-stage nuclear power programme. The CPM leader was addressing a packed auditorium of students at the School of Arts and Aesthetics in Jawaharlal Nehru University on Saturday. On his way to the auditorium, Karat, a former JNU student himself, also faced some protests by Congress-affiliated NSUI members, who waved pro-deal posters and burnt his effigy. Keeping the ante up against the deal, Karat said the Left parties would never support the Congress-led UPA government’s efforts to operationalise the nuclear deal with the US, which would make India a subordinate ally of America. Karat said that implementing the deal would mean 40 years of blackmailing by the US. He added that history and posterity would hold the Left equally responsible for if that happens. “That we will not accept,” he said. ***************************************************************** 26 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Nuclear refueling, more work set at Shippingport station - From staff and wire reports Sunday, September 23, 2007 Refueling and other work begins Monday at Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station's Unit 1 in Shippingport, Beaver County. While the unit is offline, welds on its pressurizer, spray lines and safety relief valves will be reinforced, a containment sump strainer will be increased in size and a reactor coolant pump motor will be replaced. Dave Dillon, spokesman for Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp., the plant owner, wouldn't say how long Unit 1 may be idled. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission report lists the reactor as running at 93 percent of capacity; the company said its capacity is 911 megawatts, estimated as enough power for 728,800 homes. Survey: Average pay at $18.38 per hour The average worker in the Pittsburgh-New Castle region made $18.38 per hour in January, said the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. For managers and professionals, the earnings figure was $28.34. That group was the region's largest, representing about 30 percent of the region's work force, the agency's survey showed. Sales and office workers comprised the second-largest group, 27 percent, followed by service workers, with a 20 percent share. Production, transportation and materials moving workers represented only 14 percent of the work force and averaged earnings of $15.68 an hour. The bureau surveyed 539 employers with about 1.06 million workers in an eight-county area. Duquesne seeks ruling on complaint Duquesne Light Co. wants the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to rule quickly on a complaint over its plan to leave PJM Interconnection LLC, a regional transmission organization that runs the electric grid in 13 states, including Pennsylvania. The Downtown-based utility joined PJM in 2005, but said the organization's price changes since then would increase its costs in coming years. "We don't feel that is what is best for customers," spokesman Joe Vallarian said. Duquesne has asked FERC to order Valley Forge-based PJM to exclude the utility's power load from its auctions for electricity that start Oct. 1. The company said it may join another grid operator based in Indiana; it wants to avoid costs related to the PJM auctions. Alcoa to build 'greener' buses Alcoa is partnering with a Chinese company to build lighter, more environmentally friendly buses. Alcoa Inc. and Zhengzhou Yutong Bus Co. Ltd. hope to have prototypes of the buses ready in time for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games. The first goal of the partnership is developing a design that will make buses up to 20 percent lighter than current models. Yutong Bus is China's largest bus manufacturer and the second largest in world. New York City-based Alcoa, with major operations in the Pittsburgh region, is the biggest U.S. aluminum producer. Ad agency unit expands to China A subsidiary of Mt. Lebanon-based LarsonO'Brien Advertising PR Inc. has secured business certification from the Chinese government. The LarsonO'Brien/Dashi Shanghai LLC is the first locally owned advertising, public relations and interactive firm to create and run a wholly owned and certified marketing communications service in the People's Republic of China. Larson also has acquired Dashi Design, a Chinese advertising and graphic design service with headquarters in Beijing and offices in Shanghai. Tribune-Review Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 27 Earth Times: CPI-M to discuss nuclear deal next week - India World Posted : Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:27:06 GMT Author : IANS Agartala, Sep 23 - The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) Sunday said it would take a firm decision and chalk out strategies on the Indo-US nuclear deal during its four-day meet to be held in Kolkata over the next weekend.The crucial CPI-M politburo meeting is due Friday, and will be followed by a three-day central committee meeting.'The meetings would finalise the party's final stand before the Left-United Progressive Alliance (UPA) mechanism committee meeting on Oct 5,' CPI-M Central committee member Bijon Dhar told journalists here.'We are not soft about the deal despite the country's huge energy requirement,' Dhar added.He denied media reports of any differences in opinion within the CPI-M ove the party's stand on the issue.'There are no differences between the central and state leaders over the necessity of nuclear or any other energy,' Dhar said.West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya and his predecessor Jyoti Basu recently favoured nuclear power as one of the sources for meeting the country's future energy requirements, triggering a debate on the Left's nuclear policy that is strongly opposed to the nuclear deal with the US.Dhar said the meetings would outline the party's political resolutions to be adopted in the 19th party congress, due in Coimbatore in Tamil Nadu March-end.'Before the party congress, the conferences of all state committees across the country, excluding poll bound Tripura, would be completed by February next year,' he said.The Kolkata meeting would also discuss the current political situation in the country, including the Sethusamudram project controversy. (c) Indo-Asian News Service (c) 2007 Earthtimes.org, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 28 Victoria Advocate: The long wait for nuclear power Devil is in the details of new plant applications September 23, 2007 - Posted at 12:00 a.m. BY DAN CATERINICCHIA - THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON - The promise of a U.S. nuclear renaissance will start with thousands of pages in each regulatory application, and differences of opinion about the intricate process have already surfaced before the first has been filed. "We've had pointed conversations on the level of detail" required, based on a 900-page guide the government updated in the last year, said Joe Colaccino, a reactor design expert at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "It's the one (issue) we're working on the hardest." The NRC also has issued or revised hundreds of guidance documents, and the utility industry has raised substantial concerns in areas including radiological monitoring of wastewater and vibration assessments for reactors during startup, said Adrian Heymer, senior director of new plant deployment at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington-based trade group. Industry wants a good rationale for a change instead of "someone thought it was a good idea," said Heymer, who quickly added that there are "no showstoppers" and he expects the first new plant to begin operating in 2015. But a March report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service predicted the overall review and construction process would take at least 10 years and closer to 15 years for several reasons, including new procedures. Questions about environmental issues and safety evaluations also could cause delays. Kenneth Hughey, senior manager of business development at Entergy Nuclear Inc., which is pursuing a license at its Grand Gulf plant in southwest Mississippi, expects the NRC to take the full 42 months to review the first few applications. But he said the timeline should shorten if industry builds standardized plants. "They do need to get more efficient in their review process," said Bryan Dolan, vice president of nuclear plant development at Duke Energy. The government reviews should take no more than 24 months, he said. NRC Chairman Dale Klein has said the reviews should quicken once the first license for a certain reactor design is approved. In June, the commission approved some internal task force recommendations designed to conserve resources and trim the reviews by between six months and 15 months. But one company already has delayed its nuclear plans. Progress Energy in May told the NRC that if it opts to build a new reactor in Wake County, N.C., the plant would be online in 2018 or beyond, two years past where its initial forecasts. Still, the NRC is training hundreds of workers to process the 19 applications expected through 2009. Bill Borchardt, director of the NRC's Office of New Reactors, said the agency is establishing processes to apply its regulatory decisions repeatedly so subsequent reviews will be shorter. Each application will include about 2,500 separate tasks that require requests for additional information. About 100 government employees will work on each application and every reviewer will be managing tasks on multiple projects. "We don't have anybody with any dead time," Borchardt said. The Office of New Reactors started with about 85 people late last year and is expected to grow to 430 by the end of 2007. "This is a long haul activity, this isn't something we can just lock the doors and work 24/7 for a week," he said. Exelon is making preparations for its nuclear power plant application ***************************************************************** 29 islandpacket.com: State officials must put public's interests first islandpacket.com - The Island Packet Online Hilton Head Island - Bluffton, SC Sunday, September 23, 2007 We need a debate about how we watch out for the interests of the public at large when it comes to environmental and health regulations. What are we trying to accomplish? What is the best government structure to keep our people and natural resources safe and everyone accountable? When we see a problem, do we point to the regulators who enforce the laws or do we point to the lawmakers who write them? The flap over whether state regulators withheld critical information from lawmakers deciding whether to keep the Barnwell nuclear waste dump open to all comers is just the latest example of a process that too often is topsy-turvy. Regulators say information showing radioactive tritium was found in test wells in levels far exceeding drinking-water standards was there for the asking (if only lawmakers knew to ask). But it wasn't until the information was published by The State newspaper that nearby private wells were tested and state regulators promised to monitor the wells going forward. Is this the way we want to see environmental and health protections operate? Why does it take public pressure to get regulators to take a common-sense precaution? Defenders of the state Department of Health and Environmental Control and its employees point to the mandate spelled out in the state's Pollution Control Act. It speaks volumes about what we've found so puzzling in state regulators' approach to dealing with companies over the years (emphasis added): "It is declared to be the public policy of the state to maintain reasonable standards of purity of the air and water resources of the state, consistent with the public health, safety and welfare of its citizens, maximum employment, the industrial development of the state, the propagation and protection of terrestrial and marine flora and fauna, and the protection of physical property and other resources." Clearly, this is a balancing act. But does that statement of policy strike the right balance? Are regulators there to enable industry or protect our resources? When the public fills an auditorium, as happened in Bluffton last month on a request to build docks in the Okatie and Colleton rivers, one assumes state regulators will take into consideration our input when it comes time to make a decision. But is that true? Or are these public hearings merely lip service? Public pressure has resulted in one piece of recent good news, and it shows what transparency can do. The nuclear waste site operators now say they are giving up on getting permits extended to allow low-level nuclear waste from all parts of the country to continue to come to Barnwell County. Energy Solutions doesn't have the political support for a bill extending the life of the landfill past 2008 to every state in the country, a company spokesman said. "After understanding all the politics behind everything ... it was in our best interest not to do anything more,'' Tim Dangerfield said. The Barnwell situation illustrates that public input and public pressure can be a key part of this process. Why should companies get the ear of regulators and lawmakers more often than the rest of us? Why should they have the advantage of knowing what's going on behind closed doors while the rest of us can only wonder? We need a public policy that puts protecting the public's health and protecting the environment first. Those two things are inextricably linked. And in the long run, our state's economic health depends on it. If that means laws need to change and policies need to be made clearer, then state lawmakers should get busy. Previous stories: Push to keep Barnwell open to nation dropped Pinckney Point dock plan draws fire at public hearing Email it | Copyright © The Island Packet, . ***************************************************************** 30 OpEdNews: One Step Farther Back from a DU War? September 23, 2007 at 11:51:53 by Steve Beckow Page 1 of 1 page(s) http://www.opednews.com Planes, tanks, and other munitions systems, mostly American these days, are what deliver depleted uranium (DU) munitions and spread DU in the environment. That being the case, I am heartened by any news that indicates a wrench being thrown in the works of the military machine of any DU-using nation, not just the United States. What is it about DU that is troublesome? * DU, once exploded, forms a ceramic dust that is so fine that it travels in the air worldwide. * An infinitesimally small dose of it breathed in, ingested, or absorbed through the skin can lead to lethal cancers and other illnesses. * DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. * DU cannot be protected against, treated, or cleaned up. * DU harms soldiers on both sides of a fight, civilians in the country of conflict, and all countries downwind. * Once contaminated, a country becomes a DU wasteland. * Soldiers returning from that conflict can carry DU in their gear home to their families or infect their wives with “hot semen.” * DU bonds with DNA and leads to horrible birth defects. A possible war with Iran would be the most immediate source of a very large dump of DU into the atmosphere. One threat to the U.S. carrier fleet that makes a DU war less likely is the rumoured possession by Iran of Russian Sizzler and Sunburn missiles, which are "unstoppable," carrier-busting weapons. No war in Iran, no DU dump. Now comes news of a second wrinkle, not from Russia this time but from China, that could stop the forward motion of the American military in the immediate future, even if it has ominous overtones for the far future. I am grateful for the breathing space it provides. William Thomas put out an article a few months ago saying that American military technicians had discovered a Trojan horse in their microchips -- all of which had been made in China. Three different sets of machinery failed when put through a weapons test. One would be an accident; two a coincidence; but three is sabotage. You can read that article at (1). Now Thomas has put out a second article that alleges that the Chinese have demonstrated that they can control American aircraft. They have given two demonstrations. The first was to cause such trouble aboard Vice-President Dick Cheney's homebound flight from Australia that he had to stop at Singapore, where he was met by a Chinese official who described to him in detail what had gone wrong with his plane. The second was the nuclear-armed B-52 forced to land in Minot AFB. What is not known about that flight was that, apparently, it too was "taken over" by Chinese military hackers, working through their onboard computer parts - made in China. The URL for that article is located at (2). If any country’s war machinery that threatens to dust the Earth with radioactivity is caused to stand down, I am happy, even though I know that there are long-term considerations which could be even more worrisome. At least we have an interlude in which to wake up to the fact that a war using DU weapons will kill this planet. Endnotes (1) http://tinyurl.com/2gfvcz. (2) http://tinyurl.com/2fljmf. www.freewebs.com/truthseeker22 Steve Beckow is a former Member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada and a former Historian at the National Museum of Man in Canada. He has previously published on cross-cultural spirituality and now publishes on 9/11 truth, depleted uranium, and impeachment. Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2007 ***************************************************************** 31 IAEA: PACT Day at the General Conference A Book, New Partnerships, Agreements Among The Day´s Highlights 21 September 2007 Dr. Adam Ly from Senegal presenting his new book About Cancer in Africa at the General Conference. (Photo: D. Calma/IAEA) The day designated to the IAEA´s Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy (PACT) at this year´s General Conference provided ample evidence of the young initiative´s growing role in international efforts to fight cancer in the developing world. "France salutes the IAEA´s efforts to fight cancer," said French Ambassador S.E. M. François-Xavier Deniau at a special ceremony formalizing the close collaboration between PACT and France´s International Cooperation Net*. Noting that major health issues of our time, such as cancer, require concerted international cooperation, the Ambassador said: "The International Atomic Energy Agency, which acts within the framework of the United Nations, and France, within that of the European Union, share the conviction that the fight against this plague cannot be carried out alone." Earlier, the French Delegation and PACT set up a liaison committee to formulate and oversee future strategies for the new partnership. The ceremony also showcased a new book About Cancer in Africa, by the Senegalese doctor Adama Ly. With contributions from 136 leading oncologists, epidemiologists, researchers and other health specialists from 32 different countries, the book represents an exhaustive overview and working tool for all those confronting the challenge of cancer in Africa. Dr. Ly spent three years compiling the book, which was published by the French National Cancer Institute and is available in both French and English. He said: "Cancer is a huge problem in Africa. My book, which includes the work of many cancer experts, is an attempt to tackle this problem." According to Dr. Ly, by 2020 as many as one million new cancer cases each year will occur in sub-Saharan Africa unless action is taken now. Speaking at the ceremony Werner Burkart, Deputy Director General, Nuclear Applications, hailed the new partnership, saying: "Access to cancer care in Africa is minimal and the need to build capacity is great. What is needed is a holistic and integrated approach. In this respect, it is extremely encouraging to see so many stakeholders here, prepared to collaborate." Another highlight for PACT was the successful negotiation of the terms of a tripartite agreement for the donation by India of a Bhabhatron II Teletherapy machine to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. India is donating the machine in support of the PACT initiative to implement a comprehensive cancer control programme in Vietnam. Vietnam was launched as one of PACT´s six Model Demonstration Sites (PMDS) in August 2007. The Bhabhatron unit is destined for the cancer therapy unit at Vietnam´s Can Tho General Hospital. The government of India will provide further support in the commissioning, maintenance, and training in its use. At a signing ceremony to mark the finalization of the terms of the agreement, which was also attended by Le Dinh Tien, Vietnam´s Deputy Minister of Science and Technology and Vuong Huu Tan, Chairman of Vietnam´s Atomic Energy Commission, in addition to IAEA/PACT officials, Amil Kakodkar, Secretary of India´s Department of Atomic Energy, said: "With medical equipment becoming more sophisticated and more expensive, it is impossible for poorer countries to finance the medical technology they need. It is of particular pleasure to us that this machine, developed using Indian expertise, is going to Vietnam. It strengthens our historical ties and cooperation." Earlier in the week, a delegation from the Republic of Korea presented PACT with a small but significant donation: US $10,000 gathered entirely by voluntary contribution from private individuals. (See story.) According to Massoud Samiei, Head of the PACT Programme office, Member States have donated more than US $3 million to the PACT initiative since the General Conference of 2006. A further US $50,000 has been collected through the recently-installed "DONATE NOW" option on the PACT website. "We´re delighted at the many expressions of recognition and support that PACT has received from Member States at this year´s General Conference," said Dr. Samiei. Background: Created by the IAEA in 2004 in response to the developing world´s growing cancer crisis, PACT seeks to raise cancer awareness, assess needs, develop demonstration projects and attract donors. PACT also aims to work with leading cancer organisations to develop joint programmes and raise funds for cancer care where they are most needed. PACT´s many partners include the French National Institute of Cancer; The French Ministry of Foreign Affairs; The French Ministry of Health; Oncologists without Borders; Doctors without Borders; The World Alliance Against Cancer; and the International Union Against Cancer, among others. Copyright ©, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: ***************************************************************** 32 PE: Old-time plans considered nuclear blasts to do dirty work | Press Enterprise 10:00 PM PDT on Friday, September 21, 2007 MARK MUCKENFUSS The Mojave Desert is no stranger to big booms. There are "singing" sand dunes that make a low booming noise. The occasional space shuttle or supersonic jet flying into Edwards Air Force Base elicits sonic booms that echo through our atmosphere. There is even the story, from the early 20th century, of burning and dynamiting old tires in the Amboy Crater to mimic an active volcano and attract potential tourists to the little desert town. But this boom, or booms, would have dwarfed them all. And the story is even wilder than the Amboy volcano. It came to me by chance. I was researching material on Route 66 when I unearthed a piece by Earl E. Buie, a well-known and longtime newspaper columnist in San Bernardino. According to the undated column, there were innovative plans being considered to clear a path for Interstate 40 through the Bristol Mountain range in 1967. Normally, construction crews would have blasted their way through the hills with dynamite and bulldozers. But the project directors had more intriguing materials in mind. Nuclear bombs. No kidding. According to Buie's column, "Two nuclear blasts at either end of the proposed cut would be set off, literally lifting an estimated 68 million tons of rock out of the mountain." The resultant gash in the ground was expected to be 2 miles long, 300 feet deep and 1,200 feet wide at the top. The minor annoyance of radioactivity didn't seem to have bothered the planners, or Buie for that matter. Its potential problems aren't mentioned in the piece. Perhaps the designers felt such negative aspects would be outweighed by being able to drive the highway at night without needing headlights. They did expect to save money. Conventional explosives, Buie reported, would have cost $22 million for the project. Nuclear bombs could do the blasting for $14 million. Wow, radioactivity and a savings of nearly 60 percent. You certainly couldn't accuse these folks of not thinking outside the box. But, apparently, they weren't the only ones. Scott Burnell, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, says there were other ideas for using nuclear explosions in construction projects such as dams and even oil exploration. "There were proposals to use nukes to free up oil deposits that were in otherwise untenable situations," Burnell said, "rock formations that would not easily give up the oil." Problem was, a nuclear explosion would make the oil radioactive. "People had a lot of very interesting ideas," he said. "They just didn't think them through." At least one person had enough foresight to realize the Interstate 40 project, despite its economic benefits, was a bad idea. The plan was nuked. Still, it kind of gets you thinking. San Bernardino has been dilly-dallying around with its lake project for more than a decade now. If they really wanted to build it, one well-placed nuclear device could probably do the job. Of course, it might also take out the downtown government buildings. But we could live with that. It would, after all, give the city a certain glow. Reach Mark Muckenfuss at 909-860-3059 or mmuckenfuss@PE.com © 2007 Press-Enterprise Company ***************************************************************** 33 The Hindu: Pak to establish uranium conversion, enrichment facility Sunday, September 23, 2007 : 1840 Hrs Vienna, Sept. 23 (PTI): Pakistan will establish a uranium conversion and enrichment facility as part of its plans to expand its nuclear power programme, the chairman of the country's Atomic Energy Commission has said. "To support our planned expansion of nuclear power in Pakistan, we have embarked upon establishment of a uranium conversion and enrichment facility that would cater to the needs of fuel for our nuclear power plants," Anwar Ali said at the just-concluded International Atomic Energy Agency's 51st General Conference. Ali said the facility will be placed under IAEA safeguards. While welcoming the IAEA's initiatives on "Assurances of supply of nuclear fuel", Ali said "the Agency should encourage expansion of nuclear power through the assured supply of nuclear fuel and other related services in a non-discriminatory manner." Pakistan has been pressing that the international community place it on the same footing as India while permitting civil nuclear cooperation. Ali also tried to reassure the international community over any concern over Pakistan's proliferation record, saying: "A comprehensive Export control Act is in place to ensure control over materials, goods, technologies and equipment related nuclear and biological weapons and their delivery system." Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the ***************************************************************** 34 Nevada Appeal: Nevada should turn off the water on an arrogant federal bureaucracy | Serving Carson City, Nevada Guy Farmer For the Appeal September 23, 2007, 4:01 AM Newcomers who want to understand the roots of Nevada's contentious relationship with the federal government need look no further than the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its toxic Yucca Mountain Project for an explanation. For 20 years now, DOE, Congress and the White House have consistently defied the will of the people of the state of Nevada by moving ahead with plans to build a massive nuclear waste dump (the Feds call it a "repository") at Yucca Mountain only 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, the fastest growing city in the nation. Although more than 70 percent of Nevadans oppose the project, DOE continues to waste millions of taxpayer dollars on a white elephant that will never open. In the most recent DOE outrage, a spokesman for the project defied a federal judge's definitive ruling and declared that drilling would continue at the Southern Nevada site. Following the judge's decision, James Hollrith, acting director of DOE's Las Vegas office, asserted that some drilling was exempt from State Engineer Tracy Taylor's June 1 cease-and-desist order despite a recent federal court decision ordering DOE to stop using state water for its drilling operations. To add insult to injury, Hollrith told Taylor that drilling would continue until the end of September and that the department would use at least 286,000 additional gallons of the state's limited groundwater supply. In late August Las Vegas Federal District Judge Roger Hunt ruled that the Feds couldn't ignore state restrictions by continuing to drill test holes at the Yucca Mountain site. "This entire 'crisis' is self-imposed and self-created," Hunt wrote in his 24-page decision. "The only argument the DOE makes is that because the site has been approved ... it has the authority to do whatever it wishes," which is the height of federal arrogance. "We'll do whatever we want no matter what restrictions you put on us," they're telling Nevada. That attitude obviously violates the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads as follows: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution ... are reserved to the States." Clear enough? "We're going to file an emergency request with the court to compel (DOE) to stop," said outspoken Nevada Nuclear Projects Chief Bob Loux. "We think they're thumbing their nose at the court." I agree and wonder why Nevada's top elected officials - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has vowed to kill the Yucca Mountain Project, and Gov. Jim Gibbons - haven't weighed-in publicly in support of Loux and Nevada voters. Perhaps Reid is too busy trying to end the war in Iraq, but Gibbons has no excuse. In fact, I worry about the governor's commitment to the fight against Yucca Mountain because he has waffled on the issue since taking office in January. As a Sept. 5 Nevada Appeal editorial noted, "(Gibbons) supported allowing DOE to use the state's water for an additional month...(and) appointed a Yucca supporter to the state's nuclear watchdog committee before quickly rescinding the decision after the subsequent outcry." We expect more from our governor on this life-and-death issue. "Scientific and political improprieties have been used ... to keep the (Yucca) project on track," added the Reno Gazette-Journal. "The closer DOE gets to the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) deadline, the more desperate it will be to push the project forward." Especially because Vice President Dick Cheney is pushing hard for the "repository" behind the scenes because of his well-known and well-documented friendship with Big Energy. DOE has been drilling at the dump site to compile data about the potential for earthquakes and floods that must be included in a license application that DOE must submit to the NRC by next June. But since DOE has missed every previous deadline, there's no reason to believe they'll make this one, and their target date for opening the facility has already been pushed back from 2010 to 2017 at the earliest. Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Director Allen Biaggi told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that Judge Hunt's decision "was pretty clear and convincing. We want them (DOE) to confirm to us that they've stopped using the water..." So has DOE actually stopped using the state's water? We have a right to know the answer to that question. In 1987, Congress decided that Yucca Mountain was the only site that would be studied for the nuclear dump on the insulting theory that Nevada was a thinly populated desert wasteland. But that was before the Silver State's population exploded and before Reid became Senate majority leader and moved Nevada's 2008 party caucuses to mid-January, making our state a principle player in the presidential nomination process. As far as I know only two presidential candidates - Democrats Joe Biden and Bill Richardson, a former Energy Secretary - have come out strongly against Yucca Mountain. Perhaps others have chimed in, but if so, I'm unaware of their opposition. Yucca Mountain is a major campaign issue in Nevada and the sooner the candidates recognize that fact, the better. In the meantime, the state should make sure the water is off at the dump site, and keep it off. ? Guy W. Farmer, of Carson City, is a semi-retired journalist who has been a Nevada resident since 1962. All contents © Copyright 2007 nevadaappeal.com Nevada Appeal - 580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701 ***************************************************************** 35 Pahrump Valley Times: County quartet: Scandinavia tour conforms Yucca viability Nye County's Largest Newspaper Circulation Sep. 21, 2007 By MARK WAITE PVT MARK WAITE / PVT Three members of the fact-finding trip to Scandinavia included, from left, consultant Cash Jaszczak, Nye County Commission Chairman Gary Hollis and Darrell Lacy, director of the Nye County nuclear waste project office. A recent trip to Sweden and Finland confirmed the viability of using a geologic repository to house nuclear waste, consultant Cash Jaszczak, from SRS Technologies, said. Three of the four Nevada officials who went on the U.S. Transport Council fact-finding trip to Scandinavia from Aug. 25 to Sept. 1 briefed Pahrump reporters Monday. The trip was paid for out of nuclear waste repository oversight funds. Nye County Commission Chairman Gary Hollis, Nye County Nuclear Waste Repository Office Director Darrell Lacy, Bob Gamble, Nye County's on-site representative at the U.S. Department of Energy office in Las Vegas, and Jaszczak went along. There were some differences in the repository plans: The nuclear waste to be stored at the Scandinavian facilities is about one-tenth the 70,000 tons that will be stored in Yucca Mountain, the panel said. The nuclear waste is shipped by barge in Scandinavia, not by a rail line or by truck. Both Scandinavian locations are on the Baltic Sea, the Swedish location south of Stockholm, the Finnish location northwest of Helsinki. Instead of figuring out how water can be kept out of the repository in Yucca Mountain, the Scandinavians plan to flood their nuclear waste repositories after they're full. The nuclear waste at Oskarshamn, Sweden, will be buried in a shaft over 1,500 feet deep; at Yucca Mountain the waste would be buried at the same level as the entrance, Jaszczak said. The Scandinavians will use copper canisters to house the waste in cavities filled with bentonite; the Americans will use a stainless steel alloy for the canisters. The Scandinavian repository will be in bedrock granite; the Yucca Mountain site lies in volcanic tuft. The Swedes and Finns won't take the nuclear waste back out of the repository for reprocessing; the Americans are looking into that possibility. "They're making commitments to expand their use of nuclear power. It has to do with the availability of electricity," Jaszczak said of the Scandinavians. The Swedes and Finns don't have supplies of coal and gas as alternatives, Hollis said. "They have the same issue we have in America. There's an environmental consequence for any type of electrical power they get," Jaszczak said. An important difference in the two programs is the acceptance of the repositories by the local community and different levels of government, of the repository, Jasczcak said. The communities that will house the waste actually requested the repository; in fact two communities in Sweden are both vying for it, Jasczcak said, describing something like a community out of "The Simpsons" television show, where people already work close to nuclear power plants and interim storage facilities. They feel an obligation to dispose of the nuclear waste they created, he said. "They're not afraid of the technical solutions they found and they'll work, they have confidence in that," Jaszczak said. "They're confident they've resolved the issues and they'll deal with anything that comes along." Probably more important politically, members of the tour said Swedish and Finnish government officials support the geologic repository project. "The one thing we have a problem with in Nye County, we have a congressional delegation that is against it and is not working with Nye County to make anything happen on the economic side," Hollis said. Jaszczak said the Nye County community protection plan has three objectives: to protect the health and safety of Nye County residents; to see the repository succeeds and is "not just some dump in the desert," and the transportation program used to move the waste provides economic development. Jaszczak said the U.S. Transport Council includes representatives of companies like Duke Energy, Energy Solutions, General Electric, Northrop Grumman, companies that are going to have business with the Yucca Mountain repository. Jaszczak said those companies believe the best location for their businesses would be in close proximity to the repository. "Unlike the Nevada Test Site, where the great majority of the federal largesse associated with the test site migrates to Clark County, Nye County would like to have the opportunity for the people who work at Yucca Mountain to live in Nye County and for the business and industries associated with Yucca Mountain to be located in Nye County. Those things aren't going to happen overnight," Jaszczak said. Tour members stayed in Stockholm at the Victory Hotel, with an advertised on-line special of $264 per night. It was a round of talks and speeches Monday, while Tuesday and Wednesday were spent in Oskarshamn, before catching a ferry to Turku, Finland. The delegation visited the Finnish facility planned in Olkiluoto. After the Olkiluoto tour Thursday, they had a day of talks with Finnish officials. They spent two nights at the Scandic Marski Continental Hotel in Helsinki, where the cheapest rooms are advertised on-line at $230. webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 36 Investigate Israeli Nuclear Capacity Now Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 07:23:15 -0500 (CDT) http://www.petitiononline.com/Dimona/petition.html To: Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA To Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Following comments and remarks during the week of December 10th 2006 by designated US Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert concerning the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons, we demand that the IAEA commence an immediate and comprehensive investigation into this matter. We are extremely concerned about the possibility that Israel, a country which refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NTP), possesses the capacities to develop and export nuclear weapons and technologies. Moreover, we are concerned that this high level and direct acknowledgement of Israels nuclear capabilities will drag the Middle East into a nuclear competition, with all of its dangerous implications for the region and for the world. Sincerely, The Undersigned Sign the petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/Dimona/petition.html ***************************************************************** 37 Iran warns West against attack Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:29:44 -0500 (CDT) http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL2259036320070922 Iran warns West against attack Sat Sep 22, 2007 2:43pm EDT By Hossein Jaseb and Fredrik Dahl TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran told Western powers on Saturday they would regret any attack against the country over its nuclear activities, and it rolled out a display of missiles and other military hardware that underscored the warning. "Our message to the enemies is: Do not do it," the head of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards, Mohammad Ali Jafari, said, speaking to reporters less than a week after France's foreign minister publicly raised the prospect of war. "They will regret it, as they are regretting it in Iraq," the commander added, speaking on the sidelines of an annual military parade just outside the capital. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, gave a similarly defiant message in a meeting with top officials including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, saying whoever attacked Iran "will face the consequences", state television reported. The Islamic Republic put on show medium-range missiles it has said could reach Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf in a parade marking the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. Three Saegheh jet fighters, a new generation of domestically produced military aircraft, flew overhead. Iran is embroiled in a standoff with the West over its atomic ambition, which the United States says is to make bombs but which Tehran says is solely for generating electricity. Washington has said it wants a diplomatic resolution to the dispute but has not ruled out military action if that fails. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner last Sunday raised the specter of war, but has since backed away from the comment. Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil producer, has threatened to hit back at regional U.S. interests if attacked. U.N. SANCTIONS Major powers, meeting in Washington, said on Friday they had "serious and constructive" talks about new U.N. Security Council sanctions aimed at trying to force Iran to halt its nuclear work, following two rounds of limited sanctions since December. The officials of the five permanent Security Council members and Germany said they will keep pursuing a "dual track" approach to Iran -- trying to persuade it to abandon such activities via negotiations while considering new sanctions. Ahmadinejad, addressing the parade, made clear Tehran would not bow to Western pressure. "Those who think, that by using such decayed tools as psychological warfare and economic sanctions, they can stop the Iranian nation's progress are making a mistake," he said. The Islamic Republic showed among its weaponry a type of missile, Shahab-3, it has said could reach 2,000 km (1,250 miles) -- enabling it to hit Israel and U.S. bases in the region. But the state television commentator said Shahab-3 had a range of only 1,300 km. Another missile at the parade, Ghadr-1, can reach targets 1,800 km (1,125 miles) away, he said. It was believed to be the first time it has been shown publicly. Troops, tanks and anti-aircraft guns passed in front of the podium. One truck carried the words "Death to America". Parachutists dropped from a helicopter over the parade area near the tomb of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the inspiration of the 1979 Islamic revolution and founder of the Islamic Republic. Asked how Iran would respond if any country allowed its territory to be used as a base for an attack, Jafari said: "You have seen the missiles -- just pull the trigger and shoot." ) Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 38 Daily Yomiuri: Poll: N. Korea biggest issue for Japanese Sixty-six percent of Japanese believe Japan, China and South Korea should work together to solve the dispute over North Korea's nuclear development program, according to a recent Yomiuri Shimbun survey conducted together with Chinese and South Korean media. The poll asked people about issues they thought the three nations should try to solve together. While the Japanese expressed their concern over North Korea, 75 percent of Chinese respondents said the three nations should further promote trilateral trade and economic cooperation, an opinion also expressed by 68 percent of South Korean pollees. The Yomiuri Shimbun part of the survey involved interviews with 3,000 eligible voters at 250 locations on Sept. 8 and 9 with 1,787 giving valid answers. In China, a research company commissioned by the state media's Oriental Outlook Weekly magazine conducted a survey by Internet from Sept. 2 to 8 in four cities, 21 provinces and four autonomous districts with 1,083 people aged 20 or older giving answers. In South Korea, a research company commissioned by The Korea Times conducted a survey interviewing people at 102 locations from Aug. 21 to Sept. 4, with 1,000 people aged 20 or older giving answers. The joint survey was conducted prior to the 35th anniversary of the normalization of Japan-China relations on Sept. 29, with the aim of gaining insight into people's current concerns. In South Korea, 47 percent of respondents said the three nations should tackle the North Korean nuclear issue, their second most commonly expressed concern, while in China, 29 percent of respondents expressed concern for this issue, placing it in sixth place out of seven expressed issues. Eighty-four percent of Chinese respondents said they thought relations with Japan were sour, compared with 52 percent of Japanese respondents who said they thought relations with China were bad and 42 percent who said they thought relations between the two nations were good. In Japan, 62 percent of respondents said they favorably evaluated bilateral relations between Japan and China since their diplomatic normalization in 1972, while 32 percent said they did not. In China, 43 percent of respondents said they favorably evaluated the ties, while 56 percent said they did not. The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 39 TheStar.com: The mystery of the air raid sirens | Today's Toronto Star | Star P.M. TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO A 1961 drill woke up children, but some adults claimed they heard nothing. Get outta town It was the a time of bomb shelters, warning sirens and emergency evacuation strategies. One draft plan for Toronto, prepared by the city's Planning Board in 1958 for the Department of National Defence, was called Procedures in Traffic Planning for the Evaculation of a City. Some highlights: The objective: "to get the maximum number of people out of the area to be evacuated in the shortest possible time." Preparation costs "should be kept to a reasonable minimum" and the plan should be adaptable to three different circumstances: before definite knowledge of nuclear attack, during an alert of possible attack, and after an attack to escape radiation. All major evacuation routes would be one-way out only. Early morning was the ideal evacuation time because most people would be at home with their cars and families. Motor vehicles were deemed the the most suitable means of evacuation. At the time, about 325,000 passenger cars were registered in Metro Toronto, population 1.3 million, including taxis and vehicles for sale. That broke down to a ratio of 4.2 persons per car, indicating "the theoreretical ability to evaculate the populace by car, irrespective of buses and trucks." (Currently more than 2.5 million vehicles are registered in the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area with a population of 5.38 million, a ratio of 2.1 per vehicle.) Buses would pick up people and get them out of the city, while electrically driven trolleys and streetcars would move them from denser downtown areas to collection points near evacuation routes. Drivers would be expected to pick up those who needed transportation. As for gridlock – nowhere to be found. Of course, the word wasn't coined until the '70s. Greg Smith Everyone disavowing ownership of relics from a time Toronto feared nuclear war Sep 23, 2007 04:30 AM Leslie Scrivener Toronto Star "It's a neat thing to look at," says Claire Bryden, referring to the air raid siren near the corner of Dundas St. W. and Shaw St., a remnant of Toronto's age of atomic anxiety. The sturdy, horn-shaped siren rests on a rusting column on the property of Bellwoods Centres for Community Living. Few of these Cold War relics, which would alert the population to an imminent nuclear attack, remain in Toronto. One siren resides atop the York Quay Centre at Harbourfront. Others, like the one on Ward's Island, disappear when buildings get new roofs. Today, no one claims ownership of the surviving sirens. Call the City of Toronto and they refer you to the province. Call the province and they refer you to the Department of National Defence. Call the Department of National Defence and they refer you to ... the city. But Claire Bryden is happy to take possession of the one at Dundas and Shaw. Bryden is executive-director of the Bellwoods Centres, which provide homes for people with physical disabilities. The air raid siren, overlooked for decades, suddenly became of interest during construction of a new building. Because it was in the middle of the Bellwoods Park House property, which straddles old Garrison Creek (now flowing through an underground culvert), the siren had to be moved or removed altogether. A new public path, part of a Discovery Walk daytime urban trail from Fort York to Christie Pits, will go through the property right where the siren was. What to do with the towering artifact? "Rather than throw it away, we decided it's a piece of historical memorabilia," says Bryden, who recalls air-raid-siren practice in her childhood. "It gives character, and we don't see too many around." Happily, the architect for the new building, David Warne, an associate at Levitt Goodman Architects Ltd., was of similar mind. He thought the air raid siren should be cleaned up and preserved as a piece of urban archaeology. "At the corner of the property, it could be something of a landmark," he says. "Lots of people are fascinated by older technologies, dead tech, a romanticized idea of the industrial era. It's a piece of history that's interesting." It took Warne about a week of calling department after department to find out who – nobody, it turns out – was responsible for disconnected sirens. "I called the City of Toronto Office of Emergency Management and they sent me to Emergency Management Ontario, who sent me to Public Safety Canada, and they sent me to DND, who got me the name of a captain. He was in charge of air raid sirens all over Canada. He seemed like an older gentleman who had been around at the time. "He asked me to describe the thing, and when I did, he said, `Oh, that's where that one was,' and proceeded to tell me that in the '70s they swept Ontario of all of these, and this one flew under the radar. They missed it because trees surrounded it. "I asked him if it was `hot,' and he said it had been disconnected. I asked if we could keep it there, and he said, `I don't care.' "We wanted to do it, because it's such a beautiful object and takes the story all the way around." Andrew Burtch, an historian at the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa who's writing his PhD dissertation on civil defence in Canada post-1945, tells the beginning of the story. After World War II, an increasingly aggressive Soviet Union was causing anxiety in Western Europe and North America, and talk turned to evacuating cities in case of an atomic attack. As a 1956 U.S. report on evacuation warned, fearfully: "There is only one way to survive under nuclear attack: Don't be there ... to stay will be suicide." Canada decided to develop a "passive defence system," loosely based on the model Londoners used during the blitz – warning systems, volunteer rescue and firefighting. The three levels of government agreed to take responsibility for civil defence. But, says Burtch, "municipal governments didn't attend the 1951 co-ordinating meeting, and it created a long and public dispute on where responsibility for survival lay. Each side pointed to the other as being responsible." Civil defence was chaotic and controversial in Toronto in the 1950s. The federal government delivered sirens to Toronto in 1952, but they gathered dust in storage for four or five years, because the city refused to pay for installation, insisting it was a federal and provincial responsibility. In 1954, a city controller suggested that instead of air raid sirens, two light aircraft rigged with loudspeakers be sent up as a warning system in the event of an attack. Civic leaders were further incensed later that year when a defence official said Toronto was not one of the "vital points" in Canada to be defended if the country was invaded. In 1956, the civil defence organization still hadn't erected the sirens, but it did spend $400 for teacups and saucers for refreshments for volunteers who might appreciate some refreshments after a night's training. (In 1959, Canada had 279,320 civilian volunteers drawn from the Legion, veterans and other community groups. "Everybody wanted uniforms and helmets," Burtch says. "They wanted to be recognized. But most typically they got an armband.") When the sirens were finally installed, many were defective – a problem with the wiring. And in 1959, the question of the need for an air raid siren on the Toronto Islands was raised. "Where on earth would the residents go?" the mayor of Leaside asked. A 1961 Canada-wide air raid drill led many Torontonians to complain they couldn't hear the sirens; others griped that the sirens woke their children. "By 1967 civil defence was fighting for its life," says Burtch. Then, in the 1970s, the threat of a nuclear attack began to decline, and with the development of new technologies – high-speed missiles and the like – the usefulness of a warning system diminished. Practical warning time went from three to five hours in the 1950s to less than 15 minutes in the missile age, Burtch notes. Responsibility for remaining air raid sirens – some of which are listed in The Siren Archive website (www.jmarcoz.com/sirens/sirenarchive.htm) – is as murky now as it was in the beginning. "The province owned the air raid sirens," says a city hall official. "Public Safety Canada might be a source of information – that's all I can tell you," says someone at the province. "The sirens were owned by the cities," says a spokesperson for the Department of National Defence. © Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2007 | ***************************************************************** 40 The Free Press: War in Iraq Independent News Media - Sanity in tiny nibbles by Robert C. Koehler September 21, 2007 The abyss between “crime against humanity” and “we’ll have to look into this” may be all but unfathomable — deep as a mass grave — but sometimes we have to trust the process. I fear that democratic progress is a mouse’s progress: justice — sanity — in tiny nibbles. This past Sept. 11, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed a law that seems to promise this sort of progress — to evaluate the scope of an acute, ongoing, manmade calamity — and I find myself trying to curb my sense of impatience that it doesn’t do more. The law authorizes the state to educate returning vets and National Guardsmen on their rights, as well as available testing and treatment, if they think they’ve been exposed to hazardous substances overseas, in particular, depleted uranium. It also sets up a task force through the Illinois Veterans Association to study the health effects of such exposure. Meanwhile, the profoundly undemocratic forces that have control over the mechanism of “creative destruction” on a global scale are remarkably free to wage old wars and plot new ones: to wreak mass mayhem and spread hazardous substances with impunity, in the name of national security or whatever sells, and to ignore the consequences of their actions even as democratic task forces promise, eventually, to look into some of those consequences. “Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran,” the UK’s Sunday Telegraph recently reported, apprising us of the state of the Bush administration’s slow-mo edging toward another shock-and-awe confrontation in the Middle East. We watch in helpless disapproval. Whatever else war with Iran would mean, it would mean, at the onset, another large-scale poisoning of Planet Earth and its residents — primarily Iranians, this go-around, and of course U.S. troops — with the fine-powder residue of de facto nuclear weapons: that is to say, bombs and missiles made of the high-density, super-penetrating substance called depleted uranium. DU, also known as U-238, is a byproduct of the uranium enrichment process. It’s almost twice as dense as lead, burns when launched and explodes on impact into microscopically fine particles, which are easily inhaled or absorbed through the skin; it’s also radioactive, with a half-life of more than 4 billion years. It’s a very dirty weapon, linked in every country where it has been used — Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq — with cancer and neurological, respiratory and other disorders. The time-release horror of DU, especially in tandem with other toxic substances churned up by war, belies every conceivable rationale for its use. “It’s a crime against humanity,” says Doug Rokke, a retired major and Gulf War 1 vet who headed up a cleanup crew in the aftermath of Desert Storm and has become one of the world’s leading experts on — and critics of — DU munitions. Rokke’s crewmembers, who readied U.S. tanks destroyed by friendly fire for transport back to the States, are either sick or dead, and Rokke himself has suffered for years with an array of symptoms that stem from breathing in DU dust. “I got real sick on Tuesday,” he told me last week. “I stood up and completely went down. For 30 minutes I was completely down. I had no control on the left side.” He talked about this in the context of the new Illinois law. “The doctors sure did get scared — I got scared,” he said. “But it was transient. It wasn’t a stroke but a neuromuscular effect. I was so sick on Tuesday and then Wednesday the first thing I saw when I finally opened my e-mail was this (legislation). I couldn’t be happier.” So this is my lesson in patience. This is a scary world, organized, it so often seems, for the convenience of the bellicose. The unspoken credo of the U.S. Department of Defense is surely: Mobilization without accountability. But things do change; the universe, as Martin Luther King said, bends toward justice. Thus Illinois’ new law, the National Guard Veterans Exposure to Hazardous Materials Act, may represent the dawn of official awareness that something is severely amiss. Five other states — Louisiana, Connecticut, New York, Washington and  Hawaii — have similar legislation. Our vets are getting sick in frightening numbers. Why? According to VHA figures from last fall, 205,000 GIs who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, a third of the total, have sought medical care, many for troubling internal conditions such as diseases of the nervous and digestive systems. A shocking 1,584 have been diagnosed with malignant tumors. It’s sure to get worse. And nobody, of course, is tabulating stats on the Iraqis and Afghans. But six states now have laws authorizing local agencies to look into the matter and help vets get care they could easily be denied for the illnesses they’re bringing home. It’s a start. Awareness will grow. The mice are nibbling. --- Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com. © 2007 Tribune Media Services, Inc.   The Columbus Free Press ***************************************************************** 41 Haaretz: Report: IDF raid seized nuclear material before Syria air strike - Last update - 16:40 23/09/2007 By Haaretz Service Israel Defense Forces commandos seized nuclear material of North Korean origin during a raid on a secret military site in Syria before the Israel Air Force allegedly bombed it this month, British newspaper The Sunday Times reported Sunday. The report, based on what the newspaper called "informed sources in Washington and Jerusalem," said the air strike was carried out with United States approval after Washington was shown evidence the material was nuclear related. The paper quoted Israeli sources as saying Israeli special forces had been gathering intelligence for several months in Syria, and had located the nuclear material at a compound in the country's north. In another report, Newsweek quoted Uzi Arad, a former senior Mossad official and ex-policy advisor to then-prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as saying of the reported operation: I do know what happened, and when it comes out, it will stun everyone." Netanyahu stirred anger among aides to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last week when he appeared to confirm reports of the operation - about which Israeli officials have maintained a rare silence - during an interview with Israel Channel One Television. The Sunday Times reported that diplomats in North Korea and China believe a number of North Koreans were killed in the strike, based on reports reaching Asian governments about conversations between Chinese and North Korean officials. The officials noted that ballistic missile technicians and military scientists had been working for some time with the Syrians. According to the report, the Bush Administration was given Israeli intelligence suggesting North Korean personnel and nuclear-related material were at the Syrian site over the summer, but the administration demanded "clear evidence of nuclear-related activities before giving the operation its blessing." As a result, the newspaper said, IDF commandos "almost certainly dressed in Syrian uniforms" seized samples of the nuclear material and took them back to Israel for testing. The sources confirmed that the samples were identified as being from North Korea. According to the Sunday Times, the site - near Dayr az-Zawr - now lies in ruins following the IAF strike. The report said the operation was personally directed by Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who according to The Sunday Times is said to have been largely preoccupied with it since taking up his post on June 18. The newspaper quoted military experts as saying that the operation probably could not have taken place under former defense minister Amir Peretz. Syria has said IAF planes violated its airspace and fired missiles at targets on the ground, but both Damascus and Pyongyang have vehemently denied the reports of nuclear cooperation. The Sunday Times also quoted an Israeli intelligence expert as saying, "Syria has retaliated in the past for much smaller humiliations, but they will choose the place, the time and the target." The IAF dispatched several fighter jets toward Syria Saturday, after a Syrian airplane disappeared from the Israeli radar screens, army sources said. The jets returned to base after they ascertained that the Syrian plane had crashed. Barak: Israel must operate as though war is around the corner Israel must act as though the next war is right around the corner, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Sunday at the state's official commemoration of soldiers killed in the Yom Kippur War. Barak said that the lesson from the 1973 war is that "on security matters, we cannot be deceived by apparent and imagined calm. We need self-control, vigilance, and an experienced and stable hand at the helm." The defense minister also said that "on matters pertaining to our national security, the strength of Israel must be alert and fit at all times. We must always cultivate and enhance the decisive and quality advantage of this strength, along with the warrior spirit and the tools of war." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Sunday morning during a cabinet meeting that the "security establishment operates incessantly in all sectors and brings the most successful of achievements. "Many times, these achievements are not exposed to the public, but this doesn't mean that successful operations are not carried out." © Copyright Haaretz. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 42 Project Syndicate: Commentaries: Nuclear Steps Undermine Peace by Jimmy Carter By abandoning many of the nuclear arms agreements negotiated in the last 50 years, the United States has been sending mixed signals to North Korea, Iran, and other nations with the technical knowledge to create nuclear weapons. Currently proposed agreements with India compound this quagmire and further undermine the global pact for peace represented by the nuclear nonproliferation regime. At the same time, no significant steps are being taken to reduce the worldwide arsenal of almost 30,000 nuclear weapons now possessed by the United States, Russia, China, France, Israel, Britain, India, Pakistan, and perhaps North Korea. A global holocaust is just as possible now, through mistakes or misjudgments, as it was during the depths of the Cold War. The key restraining commitment among the five original nuclear powers and more than 180 other nations is the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Its key objective is “to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology...and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament.” In the last five-year review conference at the United Nations in 2005, only Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea were not participating – the first three have nuclear arsenals that are advanced, and the fourth’s is embryonic. The American government has not set a good example, having already abandoned the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, binding limitations on testing nuclear weapons and developing new ones, and a long-standing policy of foregoing threats of “first use” of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. These recent decisions have encouraged China, Russia, and other NPT signatories to respond with similar actions. Knowing since 1974 of India’s nuclear ambitions, I and other American presidents imposed a consistent policy: no sales of nuclear technology or uncontrolled fuel to India or any other country that refused to sign the NPT. Today, these restraints are in the process of being abandoned. I have no doubt that India’s political leaders are just as responsible in handling their country’s arsenal as leaders of the five original nuclear powers. But there is a significant difference: the original five have signed the NPT, and have stopped producing fissile material for weapons. India’s leaders should make the same pledges, and should also join other nuclear powers in signing the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Instead, they have rejected these steps and insist on unrestricted access to international assistance in producing enough fissile material for as many as 50 weapons a year, far exceeding what is believed to be India’s current capacity. If India’s demand is acceptable, why should other technologically advanced NPT signatories, such as Brazil, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Japan – to say nothing of less responsible nations – continue to restrain themselves? Having received at least tentative approval from the US for its policy, India still faces two further obstacles: an acceptable agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and an exemption from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), a 45-nation body that – until now – has barred nuclear trade with any nation that refuses to accept international nuclear standards. The non-nuclear NSG members are Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and Ukraine. The role of these nations and the IAEA is not to prevent India’s development of nuclear power or even nuclear weapons, but rather to assure that it proceeds as almost all other responsible nations on earth do, by signing the Non-Proliferation Treaty and accepting other reasonable restraints. Nuclear powers must show leadership, by restraining themselves and by curtailing further departures from the NPT's international restraints. One-by-one, the choices they make today will create a legacy -- deadly or peaceful -- for the future. Secure rights Send link Printer friendly version del.icio.us | Digg it | Tailrank | Reddit | Newsvine Jimmy Carter is a former President of the United States. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2007. www.project-syndicate.org Reprinting material from this website without written consent from Project Syndicate is a violation of international copyright law. To secure permission, please contact distribution@project-syndicate.org. © Project Syndicate 1995 - 2007 ***************************************************************** 43 Reuters: Cheney mulled Israeli strike on Iran: Newsweek | U.S. | Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:06pm EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney had at one point considered asking Israel to launch limited missile strikes at an Iranian nuclear site to provoke a retaliation, Newsweek magazine reported on Sunday. The news comes amid reports that Israel launched an air strike against Syria this month over a suspected nuclear site. Citing two unidentified sources, Newsweek said former Cheney Middle East adviser David Wurmser told a small group several months ago that Cheney was considering asking Israel to strike the Iranian nuclear site at Natanz. A military response by Iran could give Washington an excuse to then launch airstrikes of its own, Newsweek said. Wurmser's wife, Meyrav Wurmser of the neoconservative Hudson Institute think tank, told Newsweek the claims were untrue. Wurmser left Cheney's office last month, the magazine reported. The steady departure of neoconservative hawks from the administration has also helped tilt the balance against war, it said. Washington has been pursuing diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to alter its nuclear program. It has refused to take military options off the table, even U.S. resources are taxed by having 169,000 troops in Iraq. Although some intelligence sources say Iran is years away from nuclear capability, Israel believes that military action may be necessary as early as 2008, Newsweek said. Israel has declined to comment on the reported air strike, while Syria has denied receiving North Korean nuclear aid and said it could retaliate for the September 6 violation of its territory. © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 44 UPI: Israeli attack on Syria had U.S. blessing United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: 23, 2007 at 9:34 PM JERUSALEM, 23 (UPI) -- Israel's attack against a Syrian military base was launched with White House approval, The Sunday Times of London reported. Prior to giving the nod, President George Bush and Pentagon officials sought -- and were given -- evidence that North Korea had supplied nuclear material to Syria, The Times said. The newspaper cited sources in Washington and Jerusalem alleging Israeli commandos seized some of the material before its air force bombed the containment site in Syria Sept. 6. A number of North Koreans were reportedly killed in the attack. Syrian officials flew to North Korea last week, reinforcing speculation the nations are coordinating a response, The Times reported. The nuclear transaction has sparked fears that Syria is joining North Korea and Iran in the development of nuclear weapons. © Copyright United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 45 UPI: Pentagon studying nuke incident United Press International - NewsTrack - Top News - Published: 23, 2007 at 7:36 AM WASHINGTON, 23 (UPI) -- The U.S. Air Force is investigating how six powerful nuclear warheads slipped from the military's safety net for more than a day without anyone knowing. "Clearly this incident was unacceptable on many levels," Air Force spokesman, Lt. Col. Edward Thomas, told Sunday's Washington Post. Six bombs inadvertently were transferred Aug. 29 from a bunker on North Dakota's Minot Air Force Base to the wing of a B-52 bomber, which flew them to a Louisiana base where they sat unguarded until the next day, the Post said. Each bomb had the power of up to 10 Hiroshima bombs. The series of missteps was serious enough to trigger a rare "Bent Spear" nuclear report from the Pentagon to the White House, the Post reported. One Minot officer has been relieved of his command, several airmen disciplined and a major general assigned to investigate. A team of scientists appointed by the Pentagon will also study the incident as part of a larger review of the handling nuclear weapons. © Copyright United Press International. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 46 Yakima Herald Republic: Black Rock Reservoir-- Hanford cleanup failure befouls project Published on Sunday, September 23, 2007 The irony was striking earlier this week when the federal Bureau of Reclamation and state Department of Ecology issued a report that said water seeping through the bottom of the proposed Black Rock reservoir could increase pollution problems at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. The possibility of a Black Rock reservoir indirectly helping push more radioactive material into the Columbia River is, of course, a concern that cannot be overlooked. On the other hand, shouldn't the overriding issue in that scenario be: When in the name of common sense and the environment is the most polluted nuclear site in the country ever going to be cleaned up? It's years behind schedule and billions of dollars -- enough to build several $6 billion Black Rocks -- over budget. And if Hanford were clean, it wouldn't matter how much of the Black Rock water seeped under it and back into the Columbia -- from which it would be pumped originally to fill the reservoir. The proposed 1.6 million acre-foot reservoir behind a 600-foot-high dam would be about 30 miles east of Yakima and filled with water from behind Priest Rapids Dam. The grounds at Hanford, lying just to the east of the proposed reservoir, are contaminated by the wastes from production of plutonium during World War II and the Cold War, from 1946 through 1990. It won't be clean for decades. Now its legacy may well include being the final nail in the coffin for a leading candidate to address critically needed water storage facilities in Central Washington. Granted, after the bureau's report, Black Rock may not be dead, but it's at least on life support. And it's government's fault. The state has been paying lip service and studying additional storage in the area since the Yakima River Basin Enhancement project was first announced by the late Gov. Dixy Lee Ray in February 1977. This most recent federal/state study concluded that Black Rock seepage would amount to 121,000 acre-feet of water in the lake's first 13 months. After the lake is filled and seepage fills the subsurface areas beneath the lake, the seepage would decline to an average of 44,900 acre-feet per year in the fifth year and an average of 41,300 acre-feet after 100 years. (An acre-foot of water is the amount needed to cover an acre of land with a foot of water.) Since all unlined reservoirs leak, that wouldn't be an insurmountable problem -- if Hanford wasn't fouling up the neighborhood. Supporters won't -- and should not -- give up on Black Rock, even though an uphill fight may have gotten even steeper. Viable options for containing the seepage should be explored. Opponents are already using the study to write off a project that has huge related economic development potential. But the need for water storage won't go away even if Black Rock does. And please, get Hanford cleaned up. We've all heard about the "downwinders," those who say they suffered ill effects from radioactive discharges into the air during Hanford's heyday. What about the "upstreamers"? We're the hapless souls in the upstream backyard of this polluted mess who now may pay the price for its presence. And Black Rock would be a very high price to pay if it turns out the Hanford connection is the main reason for scuttling it. * Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins and Bill Lee. © 2007 - Yakima Herald-Republic www.yakimaherald.com Copyright/Terms of Service | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 47 SF New Mexican: Science `worth fighting for' Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:16 pm Dr. Srinivasan Srivilliputhur who works at LANL, right, and Bob Parmelee of Los Alamos try to make their point to a protestor before Srivilliputhur's 'Save Our Science' rally at the State Capitol, Friday September 21, 2007. The rally was held by a group of people concerned by the projected cuts in the Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratory budgets proposed for 2008 by the US House of Representative Committee on Appropriations. (photo by amiran white) Betty Kuhn of Santa Fe, right, holds up an anti-Los Alamos National Laboratries sign while Dr. Srinivasan Srivilliputhur (cq) with LANL speaks during a 'Save Our Science' rally at the State Capitol, Friday September 21, 2007. The rally was held by a group of scientists and others concerned by the projected cuts in the Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratory budgets proposed for 2008 by the US House of Representative Committee on Appropriations. (photo by amiran white) Nick Dolin, 3, and his brother, Josh, 15, look for signs to hold during a 'Save Our Science' rally at the State Capitol, Friday September 21, 2007, in which their father, Dr. Ron Dolin spoke. The rally was held by a group of people concerned by the projected cuts in the Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratory budgets proposed for 2008 by the US House of Representative Committee on Appropriations. (photo by amiran white/The New Mexican) Dr. Srinivasan Srivilliputhur who works at LANL, right, and Bob Parmelee of Los Alamos try to make their point to a protestor before Srivilliputhur's 'Save Our Science' rally at the State Capitol, Friday September 21, 2007. The rally was held by a group of people concerned by the projected cuts in the Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratory budgets proposed for 2008 by the US House of Representative Committee on Appropriations. (photo by amiran white) By ANDY LENDERMAN | Associated Press September 22, 2007 Supporters of Los Alamos National Laboratory encounter criticism at Capitol rally Supporters of Los Alamos National Laboratory took an unusual step Friday and held a public rally at the Capitol, arguing that a well-funded lab is good for national security and science missions. Some lab critics showed up, too, to say that a well-paid Los Alamos will support the manufacturing of plutonium pits, which are the triggers for nuclear warheads. ``We believe science is something worth fighting for,'' said Srinivasan Srivilliputhur, a materials scientist at the lab. He said of the critics from the Los Alamos Study Group at the rally: ``We have been demonized. # We are dedicated scientists working to protect this country.'' At issue is the federal budget for fiscal 2008. The version passed by the House of Representatives would reduce nuclear weapons programs nationwide by $396 million, with most of the cuts at LANL and Sandia National Laboratories. One worst case scenario at Los Alamos would result in 2,500 layoffs. The Senate has not passed a budget. However, New Mexico's senators are pushing to fund the lab at last year's levels in a continuing resolution that's likely to be passed by Congress before the new federal budget year begins Oct. 1. The continuing resolution would let the government operate at basic levels while Congress hammers out a final spending bill. Staffers from Los Alamos first predicted that the levees would break in New Orleans, provided explosives detectors to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and worked on models that track potential pandemic flu, said Ron Dolin, an engineer who worked on those projects. Dolin and Srivilliputhur were joined by about 14 other scientists who held signs with slogans like ``LANL Stops Terror'' and ``Save Our Science.'' ``We cannot afford to disarm ourselves unilaterally,'' Srivilliputhur said. Representatives of the study group held a banner that read ``Stop the New Bomb Factory.'' The Senate version of the budget spends $251 million more on pit production than the House version, said Greg Mello of the group. ``Most of the jobs in question are plutonium warhead (pit) production-related jobs,'' Mello wrote in a flier. ``In practical terms, today's rally to `save LANL jobs' is mostly a rally to save plutonium pit production-related jobs.'' Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico also said the idea that science would be saved by maintaining the current budget is disingenuous because the proposed cuts are in the weapons program. Santa Fe County Commission Chairman Harry Montoya spoke in support of the lab, as did State Sen. Carlos Cisneros, D-Questa. Contact Andy Lenderman at 986-3073 or alenderman@sfnewmexican.com. Use | ©2007, Santa Fe New Mexican ***************************************************************** 48 TNJN.com: UT Nuclear Engineering receives $2.25 million University of Tennessee, Knoxville By Elizabeth Storey published: September 20 2007 11:56 PM updated:: September 23 2007 01:38 PM The UT Nuclear Engineering Department has been awarded $2.25 million for research by the US Department of Energy. Dr. Wes Hines, professor in the nuclear engineering department, is managing one of the research tasks that the grant will fund. "The award process required a 25-page proposal that was due May 23, 2007," said Hines. "The award was for collaborations, and we teamed with researchers from three universities: Penn State, NC State, and SC State; and Westinghouse as a no-cost partner." There are three topics of research: * Topic 1, simulator development and sensor development analysis, led by researchers from North Carolina State University; * Topic 2, multivariate autonomous control of modular reactors, led by Dr. Belle Upadhyaya of UT, and a professor from Penn State University; * Topic 3, monitoring, diagnostics, and prognostics system development, will be led by Dr. Wes Hines of UT. Hines also says that South Carolina will be participating. The title of the award is "Advanced Instrumentation and Control Methods for Small and Medium Reactors with IRIS Demonstration." "The research tasks are focused on meeting the unique needs of reactors that may be deployed to developing countries that may have limited support infrastructure," says Hines. He also says that processes developed in the research can be used for "sensor deployment analysis, autonomous control, and monitoring/diagnosis/prognosis for other facilities related to the Advanced Fuel Cycle R&D Program and the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative." Some of the award will go to student stipends, faculty salaries, tuition, and health insurance. Most of the students working with the project will be graduate students in engineering, said Hines. This grant is the largest single award that the Nuclear Engineering Program has ever received. Eleven of these awards are presented to nuclear engineering programs around the country, marking UT as one of the top programs. Editor: Kindle Rouse Copyright 2006,2007 The Tennessee Journalist University of Tennessee School of Journalism and Electronic Media | College of Communication and Information Knoxville, TN 37996-0333 | 865.974.5155 | tnjn@utk.edu This site is best viewed with Mozilla Firefox | Get Firefox ***************************************************************** 49 lamonitor.com: Rally for labs draws mixed crowd The Online News Source for Los Alamos CAROL A. CLARK Monitor County Editor Concerned citizens held a "Save Our Science" rally Friday on the steps of the State Capitol. Los Alamos National Laboratory scientists Ron Dolin and Srinivasan Srivilliputhur organized the event, which drew some 30 supporters and nearly an equal amount of individuals with differing views. Concern for LANL and Sandia National Laboratories has been escalating since the House passed a spending bill to cut $396 million from weapons budgets nationwide. The Senate has not yet passed a bill to restore those cuts. The current focus is on what level the federal government will keep the labs funded under a continuing resolution while the final spending bills for FY 2008, which begins Oct. 1, are determined. "Every day for the past 65 years, our mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, and our friends and neighbors have worked tirelessly with determination and dedication away from the public eye protecting our nation's freedom, promoting security, and preserving the peace," Dolin said. "And for that, the workers at Los Alamos and Sandia deserve the honor, the respect, and the appreciation of a grateful nation." Dolin spoke of a Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times. "Sadly, the world today is once again so cursed," he said. "We live in a troubling and unsettled world, and just as our nation looked to its brilliant scientists and engineers to defeat evil 65 years ago, this generation's top talent is today helping to battle a strengthening evil and to abate the ever more cataclysmic forces of nature." Dolin briefed the crowd on several of the labs' more recent accomplishments. "It was Los Alamos that predicted the levies would break in New Orleans 24 hours before Hurricane Katrina hit and Los Alamos that had the first federal response team on scene after the eye of the storm had passed. I know, because I was part of that team," Dolin said. "It was Los Alamos that provided the first liquid explosive detector to the Department of Homeland Security, after it was discovered terrorists were planning to simultaneously blow up 10 airplanes. It was a technology so new, so advanced that it took months to explain how it worked. I know because I was part of the team trying to promote this LANL capability. When the world worried the past two winters that a pandemic flu might kill over 100 million people, it was Los Alamos and Sandia that provided detection technology. It was Los Alamos and Sandia that considered the cascading effects of how a society increasingly dependent on government would function when goods and service were no longer available." Dolin, who also was involved in that effort, said there are thousands of others at LANL and Sandia involved in contributions to the nation and the world. "It is these thousands of significant accomplishments and capabilities we are in danger of losing should Congress continue along their ill-guided, ill-informed path," he said. "That's why I'm here today - to tell my story in the hopes that others will begin to tell theirs, in the hopes that once the compelling stories of 'My Los Alamos' are told, of your national treasures is told, people in Washington will have to pay attention. ...These are the days that determine out tomorrows." Srivilliputhur told the crowd that he is a materials scientist at LANL working on fundamental research to develop clean, safe, and efficient nuclear energy. "Contrary to perceptions, as you can clearly see, I do not glow," he said. "The people and science at LANL and Sandia have conformed to the highest standards and values that are worth defending and fighting for." Srivilliputhur said the people of the labs have worked tirelessly to enhance educational standards, cultural diversity, and economic prosperity for northern New Mexico and the nation through mentoring and scholarship programs. "We have worked tirelessly to protect our national security, fight global warming, develop cleaner and renewable energy and in space exploration to name just a few," he said. "An eye for an eye may make the whole world blind, but if we do not have the tools, technology, and ability to protect ourselves, only the good people of this world will get blind." Through cutting edge science and research, Los Alamos and Sandia have made America and the world safer and better protected, he said. "LANL has won more R&D 100 Awards than any other institution for the last 30 years," Srivilliputhur said. "Friends, this is what we're fighting to defend." Those attending the rally to express their opposition to nuclear weapons and pit production held signs and banners and passed out flyers. Greg Mello, of the Los Alamos Study Group, said in a news release, "The jobs that could be lost due to budget cuts at LANL are primarily if not exclusively due to possible declines in the nuclear "Weapons Activities" budget line for fiscal year 2008. Most of the jobs in question are plutonium warhead core ("pit") production-related jobs. Thus, in practical terms, today's rally to "save LANL jobs" is mostly a rally to save plutonium-pit- production-related jobs." Peter Neils, president of the Los Alamos Study Group said, "What I'm here to say is there's no science being done at Los Alamos that couldn't be done some place else. There's a culture of privilege that has permeated that community that makes it impossible for science to be performed competitively with other competent institutions." The organizers stated that the rally was about "wanting people in decision-making positions to know we care." To join their efforts or learn more about Save Our Science, e-mail SOSLANL@ gmail.com. For detailed comments from other speakers at the "Save Our Science" rally, see the Sept. 23, 2007, print edition of the Monitor. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 50 KOB.com: Funding of NM's labs debated Updated at: 09/21/2007 07:47:23 PM By: Eyewitness News 4 Nuclear work continues at LANL. Senators Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman urged Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to continue funding Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs in full until a final budget is hammered out. There is concern that almost $400 million in proposed cuts for the nation’s nuclear weapons labs could effect New Mexico's own labs. Dozens of people showed up for a rally in Santa Fe Friday to protest the cuts. Others protested the lab nuclear programs. The House wants to cut up to $350 million from the labs' operating budget, which could cost hundreds of jobs. Many on Capitol Hill want the nation's labs to switch from nuclear weapon-making to a focus on alternative energy or high-tch industry. Some at the “Save our Science” rally, as Friday’s event was called, said that would be a big mistake. “Scientific research at Los Alamos and Sandia has brought world peace…and protected our planet,” LANL scientist Dr. Srinivasan Srivilliputhur said. Protestors at the rally said they would like to see the labs stop developing nuclear technology. They would like to see the labs develop what they call “useful” technology. “There are a lot of brilliant minds up there. And they ought to be applying themselves to helping the world,” activist Ann Murray said. Others said they just want congress to continue funding the labs and its 12,000 employees—whatever the mission may be. The U.S. Senate still has to vote on two energy bills which are expected on the president’s desk by October 1. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************