***************************************************************** 04/21/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.101 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Environmentalist plans Chernobyl bike ride 2 Iran: Russian official says documents for another two nuclear 3 US: Security zones sought for nuclear plants 4 US: The Selling of an Energy Policy 5 US: Bush Policies Have Been Good to Energy Industry 6 Geneva converts to clean energy NUCLEAR REACTORS 7 'I won't let a Chernobyl happen here' 8 US: Nuclear Disaster Evacuation Plan Contested 9 US: Davis-Besse patch must be safe 10 US: A powerful figure loses a power play 11 Finnish nuclear reactor shut down NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 12 US: Nuclear Waste on the Highways 13 Hewson's Sellafield bid snubbed by Blair 14 US: Littwin: S.C. guv prefers going flat to Rocky Flats 15 US: Radioactive: Prepare goodbyes for Flats plutonium 16 US: Some rays of reason for Congress 17 US: Yucca: Bad! That's a bad Jon Porter! Bad! 18 US: Yucca editorial: Nuclear Waste 19 US: Utah Will Be a Nuclear Dump Forever If Production Persists 20 Sellafield faces 'illegal state aid' probe 21 Tailing dumps in south Kyrgyzstan endanger region - NUCLEAR WEAPONS 22 Stars go postal to defuse nuclear threat 23 Russian nuclear-powered submarine is back in service 24 Morocco calls for a nuclear-arms-free zone in mideast OTHER NUCLEAR 25 Govt should promote wind power 26 Playing With Energy ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Environmentalist plans Chernobyl bike ride Yahoo! News - Sun Apr 21, 6:29 AM ET LONDON - A British environmentalist plans to bike 2,000 miles (3,200 kms) to the scene of the world's worst nuclear accident to call for more ecologically friendly forms of energy. Steve Bond, 28, will start his ride to Chernobyl, in Ukraine, on Friday, the 16th anniversary of the explosion at a nuclear reactor there. He plans to set out from the Hinkley Point nuclear power station near Bridgwater, in southern England. "Nuclear energy is not really the way forward, and there should be more investment in other forms of energy," Bond said. "I am going to gather information in words and pictures which is relevant to the energy debate. ... How we manufacture and use energy is crucial in how we influence our environment." (bg) Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 2 Iran: Russian official says documents for another two nuclear reactors ready BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 20, 2002 The deputy Russian atomic energy minister has, once again, emphasized that his country was determined to complete the Bushehr nuclear power reactor. He said: All the necessary documents on the construction of another two reactors in Iran have also been prepared. Source: Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, in Persian 1630 gmt 20 Apr 02 /© BBC Monitoring /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 3 Security zones sought for nuclear plants Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter - Posted Apr. 20, 2002 Coast Guard proposes permanent off-limits area BY TARA MEISSNER Herald Times Reporter TWO RIVERS — Fishermen may have to permanently forfeit fishing at the warm water flumes funneled from the Kewaunee and Point Beach Nuclear Plants into Lake Michigan. On Oct. 12, the U.S. Coast Guard published temporary security zones around the nuclear plants that expire on June 15, according to Chief Mark Barker, Two Rivers Coast Guard. The Guard proposes establishing permanent security zones to restrict foot and vessel traffic from the Lake Michigan waters immediately surrounding the nuclear power plants. “I would rather have the area back. Who is going to hit Two Rivers, Wisconsin?” said Joe LeClair, a Two Rivers fisherman who has been catching small eating variety trout near the nuclear plant for the past 20 years. Once established, all persons — other than those approved by the captain of the Port Milwaukee, or his on-scene representative — will be prohibited from entering or moving within the zones. Currently the area is not marked, but the nuclear plants will place buoys and signs in the area once the zone is made permanent, said Doug Day, communications manager, Point Beach/Kewaunee. “By having a marked security zone, the boaters will know where they can go and it will make patrolling the area easier for us,” Day said. The Two Rivers Coast Guard will enforce the security zone because of their location, Barker said, although it won’t have boats patrolling the area around the clock. In the event of a suspicious person or boat in the restricted zone, the Guard could arrive at the scene in less than 30 minutes, Barker said. “Actually nothing would stop a terrorist,” Barker said. “It is an area we have always patrolled, but since Sept. 11 everything has changed. We are more aggressively watching out for potential targets, which the nuclear power plants fall under.” LeClair said he would like to see the restricted zone possibly be lifted in the future, rather than made permanent. “Obviously this is a popular fishing area and it is a shame to lose it, but that is the new environment,” Day said regarding increased security across American. The Coast Guard is accepting public comment regarding this proposed rulemaking. Comments and related material may be mailed to U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Milwaukee, 2420 South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, Wis., 53207 by May 20. Tara Meissner: (920) 686-2137 or Tmeissner@smgpo.gannett.com House panel likes Yucca waste plan By Gannett News Service WASHINGTON — A vast majority of House members voiced support for building Yucca Mountain in order to move nuclear waste out of their states and into Nevada. Democrats, as well as Republicans, said they wanted to move quickly ahead to build the nuclear-waste dump because the issue has been studied for 20 years. This marked the first congressional hearing on the proposed nuclear waste dump. The House is expected to pass a resolution within weeks that supports President Bush’s decision to build Yucca Mountain. The Senate will take up the issue later this year. High-level nuclear waste is being stored in more than 30 states and more than 160 million Americans live within 75 miles of a nuclear power plant or Defense Department weapons facilities, said Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La. and chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. “So for the sake of long-term public health and safety and our national security interests, it is absolutely critical that we move to develop Yucca Mountain,” he said. “It is isolated on federal land at the Nevada Test Site — 14 miles away from the closest residence — and is safe and secure.” Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, said he plans to vote on a resolution calling for the override of Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn’s veto of Yucca Mountain at a Senate energy and commerce subcommittee hearing on Tuesday. He has said he expects the bill to be approved by the full House in early May. Yucca Mountain proponents said several times that passing this resolution would only allow the process to move forward, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission still must approve the application for a nuclear waste dump. If Congress fails to support Yucca Mountain, the Energy Department has no alternative site but remains responsible for taking possession of the spent nuclear fuel from atomic power plants, said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. “There is no alternative at this point,” he said. “Failure to do this leaves us with a responsibility to deal with the waste and no plan.” Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said at the hearing that commercial power plants could continue to store their nuclear waste on-site in dry casks until the Energy Department finds a better solution than moving it across America’s highways and railroads and burying it in the Nevada desert. The costs have continued to mount for the project, which Ensign dubbed “boondoggle in the desert.” “If we know these dry casks are good for 100 years, what’s the rush?” he said. Nevada Reps. Jim Gibbons, a Republican, and Shelly Berkely, a Democrat, also spoke against Yucca Mountain at the hearing. “Yucca Mountain has not or never will be geologically sound” enough to house nuclear waste, Gibbons said. Still, the big fight remains in the Senate, which is expected to start taking up Yucca Mountain in late spring or early summer. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., did not speak at the House hearing. Reid spokesman Nathan Naylor said the senator could be more effective battling Yucca Mountain elsewhere. “We’ve got some political tricks we will pull up our sleeve,” Ensign said referring to the Senate vote on Yucca Mountain. [http://www.wisinfo.com ***************************************************************** 4 The Selling of an Energy Policy April 21, 2002 By AL GORE NASHVILLE — Under the presidency of George W. Bush, the environmental and energy policies of our government are completely dominated by a group of current and former oil and chemical company executives who are trying to dismantle America's ability to force them to reduce the extremely dangerous levels of pollution in the earth's atmosphere. The first step was to withdraw from the agreement reached in Kyoto to begin limiting worldwide emissions of greenhouse gases. Then the administration cancelled an agreement requiring automobile companies to make the leap to more fuel-efficient vehicles. Other acts of sabotage are taking place behind the scenes. Just as Enron executives were allowed to interview candidates for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — and to veto those they didn't think would approve of Enron's agenda — ExxonMobil has been allowed to veto the United States government's selection of who will head the prestigious scientific panel that monitors global warming. Dr. Robert Watson, the highly respected leader of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change, was blackballed in a memo to the White House from the nation's largest oil company. The memo had its effect last Friday, when Dr. Watson lost his bid for re-election after the administration threw its weight behind the "let's drag our feet" candidate, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri of New Delhi, who is known for his virulent anti-American statements. Why is this happening? Because the largest polluters know their only hope for escaping restrictions lies in promoting confusion about global warming. Just as Enron needed auditors who wouldn't blow the whistle when the company lied about the magnitude of its future liabilities, the administration needs scientific reviews that won't sound the alarm on the destruction of the earth's climate balance. How long they get away with it depends on how long they can sow confusion and doubt. But with folks wearing bikinis in Boston in the middle of April and with the massive melting of ice at both poles and in nearly every mountain glacier on earth, public awareness and concern are growing rapidly. At a time when the world needs enduring leadership from the United States to rally all nations to join in a concerted effort to stop global warming, the administration is working overtime to block any progress whatsoever. So tomorrow, on this Earth Day, more than ever before, we need real, forward-thinking leadership and a renewed focus on the environment. True leadership means ensuring that we take the necessary steps to leave a cleaner environment for generations to come — and that means strengthening environmental protections. Instead, this administration's so-called Clean Skies initiative actually increases air pollution levels by allowing more toxic mercury, nitrogen oxide and sulfur emissions than does current law. Put simply, on the environment, this administration has consistently sold out America's future in return for short-term political gains. True leadership means guaranteeing our national security and role as a world leader — and one of the best ways to do this is by decreasing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil, so that America cannot be held hostage to oil imports and tinhorn tyrants like Saddam Hussein. But instead this administration is now investing less in energy innovation and conservation and more in corporate subsidies for oil exploration and extraction and nuclear power. True leadership means assuring an economy that rewards innovation and productivity. We can do so by leading the world in investments in technological innovations that will result in environment-friendly products like more efficient cars and renewable energy sources. Such investments would open up the door for new economic growth. But this administration is taking only those steps that increase our addiction to fossil fuels and outdated and inefficient technologies. On all these fronts, this administration has walked away from the tough choices and has instead chosen to subsidize the solutions of the past. Instead of leading, it has attempted to mislead. Instead of sharing a vision with the people, the administration has given access to special interests. We can return to the path of progress, on which we value economic growth that rewards innovation and productivity and meets the needs of our families and of national security. We can return to the days of record growth coupled with record improvement in the air we breathe. We can return to true leadership on the environment. We ought to look at the environment as a critical piece of the nation we will be. I urge Americans to re-engage in a forward-looking discussion of how to secure our nation's energy needs while pursuing environmental policies that will make us safer, more efficient and more respectful stewards of our planet and our nation's great potential. Al Gore, vice president from 1993 to 2001, is a professor at Fisk University and Middle Tennessee State University. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 5 Bush Policies Have Been Good to Energy Industry April 21, 2002 By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and NEELA BANERJEE Associated Press President Bush with Christie Whitman, the E.P.A. administrator, at a Pennsylvania power plant last May after the release of an energy report. WASHINGTON, April 20 — By voting this week to block drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the Senate dealt a setback to the petroleum industry and to President Bush, who had made oil exploration in the refuge a cornerstone of his national energy policy. But the defeat was hardly total. The oil and gas industries — indeed, the entire energy industry — have won an abundance of appointments and regulatory decisions made by Mr. Bush and his 15-month-old administration. For example, in the House energy bill passed last year, and the Senate bill still being debated, the energy industry stands to gain billions of dollars of tax credits and subsidies. The Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management has begun opening public lands for oil and gas exploration. Last year, four million new acres were added for oil, gas and coal mining, up from 2.6 million acres in 2000, agency data shows. And environmental groups are complaining that the Environmental Protection Agency is considering changing water pollution rules to make it easier for coal companies to mine for coal by removing whole mountaintops. Currently, the earth carved from mountains is defined as waste and cannot be dumped into streams and rivers. The environmental agency is considering changing the definition in a way that would allow coal companies to discard the mountaintop refuse into the water, defining it as allowable "fill." One day after the release of the White House's national energy report last May, President Bush visited a Pennsylvania hydropower plant and vowed that his administration would quickly carry out the plan. "I can assure the American people that mine is an administration that's not interested in gathering dust," Mr. Bush said. That same day, Mr. Bush signed two executive orders that had been recommended by influential trade groups, the American Petroleum Institute and the American Gas Association. The orders were intended to speed the construction of new energy projects. Environmentalists and some Congressional Democrats criticized the president for what they described as allowing the industry to "hold his pen." An administration official estimated at the time that 85 of the 105 energy proposals in the national energy policy could take effect without Congressional action. Already, the administration has moved repeatedly to increase oil and gas production and roll back regulations put in place or strengthened during the Clinton administration. Critics of the administration's energy policies say the White House is rewarding its campaign supporters. "We cannot dig, drill and destroy our way to true energy independence," said Sharon Buccino, a senior lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "If the Bush administration truly had the good of us all in mind, they would get serious about fuel economy and efficiency.." Scott McLellan, deputy White House press secretary, said the administration was determined to keep energy affordable and to protect the environment. "This is the first administration in decades to address the energy needs of every American in a comprehensive way with a comprehensive plan," he said. Mr. Bush has named at least 30 former energy industry executives, lobbyists and lawyers to influential jobs in his administration. Some of them have helped the government carry out major parts of the energy policy without waiting for Congressional action. Executives and lobbyists for the nation's energy industry have long argued that the Clinton administration had granted environmental groups far greater access when formulating energy policies. Now, they say, the pendulum has swung the other way, with the Bush administration developing a more balanced position that emphasizes increasing the output of oil, coal and power. "The people running the United States government are from the energy industry," said Fredrick D. Palmer, executive vice president of external affairs for Peabody Energy, the world's largest coal company. "They understand it and they believe in energy supply." More than any other part of the energy business, the coal industry seems to have fared best under the Bush administration. The industry provided critical support for Mr. Bush in traditionally Democratic states during the last election, most notably in West Virginia. More than 50 percent of the nation's electricity is generated by coal-burning plants. "For eight years, we had an administration that was actively antagonistic to coal and oil," said Rob Long, vice president for governmental affairs for the National Mining Association. "To have an administration that is even agnostic on fossil fuels is an improvement." The Bush administration and Congressional energy bills plan to give the coal industry $3.37 billion in financing and tax incentives over the next 10 years to develop expensive, experimental technologies to burn coal more cleanly. Environmentalists argue that clean-coal research is wasteful, citing recent reports by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, that say the existing Clean Coal Technology Program was badly mismanaged. And regardless of how coal is burned, the industry's critics object to mining practices like mountaintop mining, used mainly in West Virginia. Environmentalists say mountaintop removal has despoiled 1,000 miles of streams. William B. Raney, president of the West Virginia Coal Association, asserts that the state's water protection laws are the toughest in the country. But local environmentalists say the Bush administration, unlike the Clinton administration, has not rejected state regulations that weaken protection of the water system. Environmental groups are suing the Bush E.P.A. over the question. The environmentalists say that the Bush E.P.A. is moving to change a rule in the Clean Water Act that would make it easier for coal companies to remove mountaintops. Currently, the earth carved from mountains is defined as waste and cannot be dumped into streams and rivers. An agency spokesman, Joe Martyak, said no decisions had been made, so it was "premature" to judge the agency's actions. A clear early victory for the fossil fuel industry came in March 2001, when President Bush decided not to impose new controls on emissions of carbon dioxide, a gas widely believed to cause global warming. He said he feared such limits would endanger economic growth. The decision reversed his campaign pledge to set mandatory reduction targets for carbon dioxide. Energy lobbyists oppose mandatory regulation of carbon dioxide emissions. The administration is now pushing ahead with its "Clear Skies" initiative aimed at reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide, which are already regulated as pollutants, as well as mercury, which is not. It will not address carbon dioxide emissions. A bill offered by Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont, an independent whose defection from the Republican Party handed control of the Senate to the Democrats, would regulate all four pollutants. "We like the approach that they have proposed on the three-pollutant strategy," Bill Brier, vice president of communications of the Edison Electric Institute, a power industry lobbying group, said of the White House's position on climate change. "We feel this approach would eliminate 75 percent of pollutants people claim lead to health ailments." With Mr. Bush's roots in the Texas oil patch, many in the oil industry and the environmental community thought the business would thrive under this administration. The oil industry would certainly benefit from the White House's refusal to mandate reductions in carbon dioxide and its efforts to reshape clean air regulations. But some goals specific to the industry have been thwarted, among them efforts to widen the acreage for natural gas drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of Florida, and to have unilateral sanctions against Iran and Libya lifted. The industry, however, may benefit from a sizable windfall, thanks to a decision by the Bush administration not to reauthorize taxes that feed the Superfund toxic waste cleanup program. Instead, most of the costs would be shifted from industry to taxpayers. The decision not to seek reauthorization has been challenged by Senate Democrats. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 6 Geneva converts to clean energy Swissinfo Science & Health Swiss time 05:45, Monday 22.04.2002 Geneva is determined to switch to renewable forms of energy, like hydroelectric power (picture: www.sig-ge.ch) The use of renewable energy will receive a big boost when Geneva becomes the first Swiss canton to allow customers to choose the source of their electricity. This will be the first time in Switzerland that all consumers in a given area will get to decide how their energy is produced. It is also the first time that the default energy will be 100 per cent renewable - in this case hydroelectric. "This gives every citizen a stake in his own future," says Robert Cramer, the cantonal environment minister. "It's taken some time to integrate the people's choice into our energy policy, but now their patience is being rewarded," he added. The new system, called SIG Vitale, will be introduced by Geneva Industrial Services (SIG) on July 1, less than three months before the Swiss people vote in a referendum on the liberalisation of the electricity market. In the run-up to the vote, SIG is hoping to demonstrate that it is possible to be competitive and ethical at the same time. "Launching these products ahead of the vote helps us to educate people and make them more sensitive to the issues surrounding the energy of tomorrow," says Raymond Battistella, director general of SIG. All customers will be able to opt for one of four colour-coded kinds of electricity - three of them entirely ecological. Savings The default option, which is 100 per cent hydroelectric, will be Blue. At one centime per kilowatt hour cheaper than the SIG Mix, it will save a family of four around SFr36 a year. The Yellow option's selling point is that it will be produced in the canton, and therefore will sustain local producers. The more expensive Green choice offers a combination of renewable energy sources – solar, wind, as well as water – that will help to fund the development of these alternative forms of power. The fourth option, dubbed SIG Mix, is the electricity currently in use, which uses a combination of renewable and non-renewable sources. It is likely to be attractive to big energy consumers in industry, though SIG says it will try to convince companies to use green energy so they can market themselves as environmentally friendly. While Geneva is not the first to offer consumers green energy - a number of other countries and cantons have offered "niche products" for small sections of their population – no one has done it on such a scale. Sustainable development "What we're trying to do here is achieve a complete change in consumer habits, moving as much as possible towards 100 per cent renewable energy," Battistella told swissinfo. The change is in line with the cantonal government's commitment to sustainable development, and its desire to phase out the use of nuclear power. "We have made a choice to orient ourselves towards sustainable development. We're putting into action our conviction," says Battistella, adding that the move is also strategic. "Our move takes a bit of courage, but our research shows that Geneva is mature enough for it. Ultimately it's the people who will decide how they want to be sourced. If we can keep costs realistic, people will opt for renewable energy," he adds. Nuclear ban In 1986, the Geneva constitution was changed to ban the construction of nuclear power plants on its territory. But 16 years later, 28 per cent of the electricity consumed in the canton comes from nuclear power stations. That figure should fall considerably come July, when some 70 per cent of inhabitants will be using the "blue" hydroelectric energy, with ten per cent each opting for the Green and Yellow options. But how can consumers be sure they are receiving the electricity they have signed up for? The simple answer is, they cannot. But SIG says it will guarantee that the electricity in the network corresponds exactly to what has been purchased. "The electrons won't turn blue just because you have signed up for SIG Vitale Blue," says Battistella. "Our commitment is that we will put on the network exactly what the customer buys, and this will be certified by independent surveyors." So it is all a question of proportion. As long as consumers somewhere in Geneva are buying SIG Mix, there will be some electricity from non-renewable sources in the system. But the hope is that this will continue to decrease, until one day it is no longer required. by Roy Probert 20.04.2002 - 10:43 ***************************************************************** 7 'I won't let a Chernobyl happen here' Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Ali Hewson, wife of U2's Bono, on why the band is leading a campaign in Ireland and beyond about the nuclear threat from Sellafield Amelia Hill Sunday April 21, 2002 The Observer [http://www.observer.co.uk] From her living room in Co Dublin, Ali Hewson, the wife of U2 frontman Bono, looks out across the Irish Sea - which bobs across to the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant, squatting bleakly on Britain's Cumbrian coast. She both loves the view and resents it for its daily reminder of the danger that the plant poses. 'This is a nuclear-free land and yet if anything happens to that plant, the east coast of Ireland is straight in the firing line,' she says. 'The Irish nation is not even in the debate; we have no choice and yet we take all the risks. Hewson's Shut Sellafield campaign - one of the largest environmental protests launched by one nation against another - grew from a late-night chat with Bono in January. If every household in Ireland could somehow be persuaded to register their concerns with the British Prime Minister, they agreed, things might start to change. 'This is an issue of acute, personal concern to every Irish resident,' she said. 'We are sitting ducks just waiting for an accident to devastate our lives and our country. 'The British Government has ignored our concerns about this for long enough. We will make this an election issue and, if we don't make them listen this year, we will come back next year and the year after.' The suggestion has, thanks to Hewson's endless energy, grown to dominate the Irish community over the past fortnight. Supporters run the gamut of Ireland's pop and sporting successes, including Ronan Keating, Westlife, Samantha Mumba, U2 drummer Larry Mullen and pop siblings The Corrs, alongside the World Cup football squad and the national rugby team. Ireland's politicians would, Hewson said, have been delighted to leap on board, but: 'I have wanted to keep this on a civil level because I see it as a health and environmental battle, rather than a political issue. I wanted the average man and woman on the street to have a chance to say how they feel; after all, it is they who will live or die.' The protest, which has seen almost every one of Ireland's 1.3 million households return their prepaid postcard bearing an anti-Sellafield message, will reach its climax on Friday, when the cards are delivered en masse to the breakfast tables of Tony Blair, the Prince of Wales and the chief executive of British Nuclear Fuels, Norman Askew. Sellafield has long been a source of contention between the British and Irish governments; the Irish government has repeatedly challenged the plant in the European courts, without success, and even took out a series of anti-Sellafield advertisements in the British press last year. 'When we tested out support for our campaign, we were amazed by how personally every Irish person takes this issue,' said Hewson. 'Almost everyone we spoke to had some story about how they, their family or their friends had suffered from an illness they were convinced was linked to Sellafield.' Their fears were boosted last week when the British Green MEPs launched a highly critical report on Sellafield's discharges, alleging that the two million gallons of mildly radioactive waste water the plant discharges into the Irish Sea each day are equivalent to a large-scale nuclear accident each year. Such claims, however, are dismissed by the UK Department of Trade and Industry, which disputes the alleged links to cancers and insists that Britain is making good progress towards cutting discharges to close to zero by 2020. 'We already have the most artificially radiated sea in the world washing up on our shores,' said Hewson. 'All we're asking the British government to do is to err on the side of caution. I have seen what happened in Chernobyl and there is no way I am going to let that happen here. 'We know the plant can't be shut down because the waste that is already there needs to be stored and protected for thousands of years, but we want the British Government to stop producing more material. 'If Tony Blair could look me in the eye and tell me my children are definitely safe, I might leave them alone. But in the past five years there have been more than 15 incidents that have left us with serious cause for concern,' she added. 'After 11 September, everyone is questioning their own personal safety and their children's safety, and, when the people of Ireland look at their vulnerability, Sellafield sticks out like a sore thumb. 'The plant has to be on top of any terrorist's list. The result would be catastrophic not only for the people of Ireland, but for everyone in Britain and Europe, too.' amelia.hill@observer.co.uk [amelia.hill@observer.co.uk] [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 8 Nuclear Disaster Evacuation Plan Contested FOXNews.com FNC Indian Point nuclear power plant in Buchanan, New York. Saturday, April 20, 2002 By Douglas Kennedy Editor's Note: This is the second of a series of reports examining the safety of the nation's nuclear facilities. NEW YORK—A terrorist attack on a nuclear power plant and the panic that would ensue is a nightmare that has kept many Americans up at night since Sept. 11. Particularly concerned are those who live near the plants, fearing they would be trapped in close proximity of a radioactive leak because of traffic jams. "It's beyond enormous," said Elise Cooper of Chappaqua, N.Y. "It's just unthinkable." Cooper lives less than 10 miles from the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant and within the danger zone should an accident, or attack, occur. Weekday traffic in the area is bad enough, she said, even without a catastrophe causing the streets to jam with fleeing residents. At a nearby day care center, there are fears of being able to successfully pull off an evacuation plan that requires getting 100 kids on buses. Similar post-Sept. 11 concerns are now being echoed in communities across the country. There are currently 161 million Americans living within 75 miles of a nuclear power plant. "There's nothing to worry about and only a very limited amount of people will actually have to evacuate," said Jim Steets, spokesman for Entergy Corporation, a global energy company. Indian Point is located exactly 33 miles north of Times Square. A recent poll showed 60 percent of New Yorkers, including commuters, would attempt to flee in the event of a problem at the power plant — a fact government officials say exposes a major flaw in federal evacuation plans. "The plan specifically says no one will move outside of 10 miles if they try to move people within 10 miles of the plant," said Richard Brodsky, a New York State assemblyman. "That's a joke." Brodsky represents the people who live around Indian Point and says the plan cannot work. "You're going to see gridlock like you've never imagined," he said. "People are going to be dead, injured or killed." This is assuming people will leave en masse, and to the owners of Indian Point, that's a mistaken assumption. "People from New York won’t have to evacuate," Steets said. But Cooper isn't buying it. She says there is only one safe evacuation plan. "They should close it down," she said. "They should have closed it down a long time ago." Especially, she said, after Sept. 11. Fox News' Amy C. Sims contributed to this report. Copyright © 2002 Standard &Poor's Fox News Network, LLC 2002. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 Davis-Besse patch must be safe The Plain Dealer Editorials 04/20/02 Nuclear Regulatory Commission experts roughed up FirstEnergy Corp.'s team during a recent discussion on proposed repairs at the Davis-Besse nuclear power station. Good for them, because the credibility of both the NRC and FirstEnergy hangs in the balance. And the stakes are even higher for the 6 million people who live near the closed Toledo-area nuclear power station. FirstEnergy's team had barely presented its repair scheme before NRC experts were challenging and probing it for hidden weaknesses. The plan calls for using special equipment to weld a 400-pound plug into the gaping hole in the reactor head. The repair job requires NRC approval, and this is the first time such a patch would be used on such a large power station. Meanwhile, critics charge the NRC let the company get away with sloppy inspections. In addition to the hole in its reactor head, FirstEnergy faces a hole in its credibility and its profits. The company's earnings have wilted as summer and the NRC bear down on it. And it expects problems with getting a replacement reactor head (which won't arrive for at least two years) into the building. Having Davis-Besse patched by July and back on line has become the company's mantra. But the NRC's first duty must be to make sure the plug can do the trick until Davis-Besse's new reactor head is in place. Safety has to be the top priority. © 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. © 2002 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 A powerful figure loses a power play Philadelphia Inquirer | 04/21/2002 | By Benjamin Y. Lowe Inquirer Staff Writer Two years after he was enlisted to fix its Peach Bottom nuclear plant, Corbin A. McNeill Jr. held one of his first "all hands" staff meetings at Philadelphia Electric Co. The 1990 meeting illustrated how McNeill intended to carry the company through what would become a period of unprecedented change. He ultimately did so, but he retires Tuesday after losing a corporate power struggle. Talking at the meeting about the company's future, McNeill, who had just been promoted to president, rose from his chair and, as would be his custom, started drawing on an easel before making his point. McNeill drew a mansion on a mountain with a river below, according to an employee at the 1990 meeting. Their task, McNeill told the employees, was to ford the river, climb the mountain, and build the mansion. He would recall later that the company at the time faced serious problems, as did the Peach Bottom plant in Delta, York County. Federal regulators in 1987 had shut down the plant because operators were found sleeping on the job. "I'll support you every step along the way," he said. "I'll move other mountains to get you the tools to do the job. But don't you ever, ever dare ask me how [to do your job]." With his deep, booming voice, bulky frame, and a passion for being first, the former naval nuclear submarine commander wanted to climb the mountain - but insisted that his employees figure out how to do it. For McNeill, 62, the mansion represented what Philadelphia Electric - the name was changed to Peco Energy Co. in 1994 - had to become to remain competitive in what would be a fast-changing industry. Peco needed to be bigger, more efficient and less complacent to prepare for when it would have to answer to consumers in a free electricity market, rather than to state officials in a regulated one. Though the company stumbled initially – recording a $1.5 billion loss in 1997 and cutting its dividend – it regained its footing by the time competition began in 1999. McNeill will retire as chairman and cochief executive officer of Exelon Corp., the company formed in October 2000 by the merger of Peco and Chicago's Unicom Corp. He and Exelon will not say why he is leaving, 18 months ahead of schedule - though a company insider said it was because the board of directors two months ago rejected McNeill's plan to acquire Dominion Resources Inc. Dominion would not confirm or deny that a deal had been in the works, but it hinted that the companies had spoken. "We tried to save the world," Thomas E. Capps, a friend of McNeill's and chairman and chief executive officer of Dominion, a Richmond, Va., utility, said in an interview. "I'll leave it at that." McNeill leaves a very different company from the one he joined in 1988 as head of nuclear operations. Besides providing electricity and natural gas directly to consumers, it now has investments in telecommunications and trades its surplus electricity nationwide. Exelon, whose $15.1 billion in revenue last year is nearly five times that of Peco 14 years ago, is on track to achieve its merger-related savings goals of $225 million for 2002. But its 2002 earnings will be 6 percent lower than it originally forecast because of a weaker than expected economy and a beleaguered telecommunications industry. Of Exelon's cochief executives, McNeill is the risk-taker. His more deliberate counterpart, John W. Rowe, opposed a Dominion deal. McNeill's post-merger responsibilities included running the company's electricity-generation business, based in Kennett Square. He spent most of the last year growing that business by purchasing power plants and expanding electricity trading. The catch is that Exelon's financial performance came to depend heavily on the highly volatile electricity prices in the wholesale market. When those prices plummeted in the second half of 2001, the company was forced to pare its earnings expectations for 2002 and 2003. Now, Wall Street analysts expect Exelon to acquire another utility, said Edward Tirello, senior power strategist with Berenson Minella &Co. in New York. But analysts say that with Rowe in charge, it is likely to be a small one, such as DQE Inc., a Western Pennsylvania utility with 580,000 customers. Exelon, the country's largest operator of nuclear power plants, has five million customers. Corbin Asahel McNeill Jr. started his private-sector career 21 years ago as a nuclear plant manager for the New York Power Authority. Since McNeill joined Peco, the company's stock has outperformed its industry group, measured by the Dow Jones utilities index, by 162 percent. A $1,000 investment in 1988 would be worth $5,320 today. (Peco shares were converted to Exelon shares on a one-for-one basis.) Even with Peco's growth, McNeill slashed the workforce to make the company leaner in preparation for electricity deregulation: The 6,600 employees at the time of the merger were about half the total when he arrived. McNeill, whose total compensation was $5.4 million last year, owns Exelon stock worth $60.3 million as of Friday and was granted $7 million in severance pay. The company's largest individual shareholder with 1.13 million shares, he has options to buy an additional 1 million shares. An internationally recognized figure in the field, McNeill still believes that nuclear power is vital to the United States - even with the threat of terrorist attacks on power plants. Though McNeill said in an interview this month that he no longer wanted to be a full-time corporate executive, he intended to continue advocating construction of nuclear reactors. "It is the most environmentally acceptable mechanism to support the economic well-being of not only the U.S., but also a great part of the world - [one] that will depend more and more on electricity and the quality of life it can provide," he said. Rowe, who becomes chairman and sole chief executive on Tuesday, is more inclined to build natural-gas-fired plants. Last week, he canceled Exelon's role in McNeill's pet project, a partnership in South Africa developing a new kind of nuclear reactor. Some critics have said McNeill was wrong to pursue nuclear power in the first place. "His vision is blurred," said Eric Epstein, head of the EFMR Monitoring Group, a Harrisburg advocacy group that closely watches the Three Mile Island, Peach Bottom, and Susquehanna nuclear plants in Pennsylvania. "Corbin will not be around when it's time to pay up," he said, alluding to the high cost of decommissioning old plants. McNeill considered his acquisition of nearly discarded nuclear plants - such as Three Mile Island and Oyster Creek in New Jersey - for a fraction of their book values to be a major accomplishment. Peco, for example, paid $100 million in 1998 for Three Mile Island. Completed in 1974, it had cost $700 million to build. McNeill's 1990 use of the mansion metaphor highlighted several components of his leadership style. Ready for deregulation 10 years before it happened in Pennsylvania, McNeill considers himself a leader – not a manager – and he expects results. He thinks strategically and looks for opportunities in any venue, whether it be navigating Peco or facilitating Philadelphia's role in the Army-Navy football game. "Whereas management will deal with processes and performance, leadership is vision, inspiration, and really the motivation of people to achieve a common goal," he said. He is a quick decision-maker with a command-and-control style developed in the Navy. When McNeill has been dissatisfied, he has never hesitated to let colleagues know - with his thunderous voice or, sometimes, even by throwing books or chairs at them, employees recalled. "He could not stand indirect responses, incompetence, or someone who would make an excuse," said Nicholas DeBenedictis, a former Peco executive who is now chief executive of Philadelphia Suburban Corp., the Bryn Mawr water utility. McNeill, DeBenedictis said, is the type of person who would say, " 'Let's get it done, I don't have time to waste.' " Peco's nuclear plants were operating at no more than 65 percent of capacity before McNeill started; they now run in the mid-90-percent range. And the time it took to refuel the plants has dropped from four months every year to 22 days every two years. Also a change for Peco was trying new ventures - and scrapping them if they did not work out, said Kenneth G. Lawrence, president of Peco, now an Exelon unit. McNeill frequently ventured beyond his office, visiting Peco nuclear plants on weekends, stopping by to talk with crews on the side of the road, and handling crises at the scene, something he attributes to his having commanded 120 enlisted seamen on the USS Tautog. "These are the people that actually produce things for an organization and deserve a lot of credit for what gets done," he said. Three union drives at Peco have failed under McNeill. A fourth is under way. Those who have watched McNeill said he refined his style as he assumed additional corporate responsibility. The transition started when McNeill, whose gruff style alienated some, launched an unsuccessful hostile bid for Allentown's PPL Corp. in August 1995, four months after he became chief executive. "He realized you could not bull your way through deals the way you would through a nuclear power plant," said David Schanzer, a 25-year Peco employee who has been an analyst at Janney Montgomery Scott since 1992. "He learned you need common interest and willing partners." McNeill's transition also included adjusting to the more public role of chief executive, said Thomas P. Hill Jr., a 30-year Peco employee and its current vice president of finance. "He became a much better, [more extemporaneous] public speaker," Hill said, adding that McNeill learned to involve himself in the community - a step practically required for the head of one of the area's most prominent companies. He was a trustee at Drexel University, served on the board of Greater Philadelphia First, an economic development advocacy group, and was chairman of Leadership Inc., a Philadelphia executive training center. McNeill's intensity applies not only to his work. An avid skier, golfer and hiker, he is known to bellow after a good golf shot or ski run. "Corbin is the kind of guy that after he has a good run, you'll hear him four hills over," said Michael J. Egan, Peco's former chief financial officer. Besides owning the latest personal electronics devices, he has made sure that Peco has had the latest equipment. One need only look, for example, at the company's Kennett Square trading floor - a mini-stock exchange. McNeill scoffed when a reporter recently asked if his handheld computer was a Palm Pilot. It's an iPAQ, he retorted. (A Compaq iPAQ is eight times more powerful.) Now, with the merger integration progressing and the company operating in electricity markets across the country, McNeill said Peco's employees had built that mansion and it was time for the company to have one chief executive. "We have taken a company that at one point in time was referred to as an embarrassment to the industry and, through a number of internal changes and the merger," he said, "we positioned it to be one of the real strong participants in this industry." Contact Benjamin Y. Lowe at 215-854-2453 or [blowe@phillynews.com] . ***************************************************************** 11 Finnish nuclear reactor shut down Saturday, 20-Apr-2002 2:50PM Copyright 2002 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet) RAUMO, Finland, April 20 (AFP) - A nuclear reactor in Finland has been shut down after a problem with the power supply, the FNB news agency said Saturday, ahead of a parliamentary vote on whether to build a controversial new plant. One reactor at the Olkiluoto plant on the west coast about 250 kilometres (150 miles) northwest of Helsinki shut down automatically, an incident that usual occurs about once a year, the agency said. Officials said the shutdown, triggered by a disruption to the power supply, proved that the Olkiluoto's security systems worked perfectly, and that the reactor should start working again on Sunday. Finland, which is relatively flat and largely devoid of natural resources apart from vast forestland, has two nuclear power plants built in the 1970s each with two reactors. They provide about one-third of the country's electricity. Parliament is expected to vote as early as May on a controversial fifth reactor following government approval in January for the scheme, which was originally put forward in the mid-1980s but was shelved after Ukraine's 1986 Chernobyl disaster. ***************************************************************** 12 Nuclear Waste on the Highways April 21, 2002 The volatile issue of whether it is safe to transport highly radioactive nuclear materials around the country has been pushed before the public by the state of Nevada in recent weeks. In a desperate effort to avoid becoming the nation's burial spot for spent fuel rods from nuclear plants, Nevada has begun to run advertising that warns the residents of 42 other states that they will be "IN GRAVE DANGER" from truck and train shipments of the waste unless they persuade Congress to block the burial plan. That may be Nevada's best shot politically, but it ignores two salient facts. Spent fuel rods have been shipped in small quantities for decades now with no obvious harm to the public, and whatever new risks may emerge with more numerous shipments in an age of terrorism will have to be addressed in detail by federal regulators before they approve the burial plan. Nevada's hyperbole provides no reason for Congress to abort a promising plan before the issues can be closely analyzed. The transportation issue has come to the fore in the wake of the Bush administration's formal proposal to build an underground repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada to accept spent fuel rods that are now stored at the sites of nuclear power plants. Nevada has vetoed the plan, and Congress has until July 26 to override that veto and push ahead. Nevada contends that the Yucca Mountain site is unsuitable and cannot safely contain the waste for the 10,000 years required. But that is an issue that has little resonance elsewhere, so the state has buttressed its argument with alarming statements about transportation risks that, according to its governor, endanger some 123 million Americans in states along the way. Nevada cites estimates that some 96,000 truck shipments — or about 19,000 rail shipments — would be needed to transport the waste over three to four decades, and the state says that would expose communities along the way to the risk of radiation exposure from accidents or terrorist acts. The state estimates that there might be 130 truck accidents or 440 train accidents over that period. It contends that a credible worst-case accident could release enough radioactive material to cause hundreds of cancer deaths and cost tens of billions of dollars to clean up. These are merely speculative estimates that have yet to be subjected to the kind of rigorous scrutiny needed to form national policy. By contrast, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the agency designated to protect the public from such disasters, has conducted its own analyses over the years and found very little likelihood of an accident that would release enough radioactivity to harm the public. The massive casks that are used to transport the spent fuel rods are designed to survive punishing tests in which they are dropped onto hard surfaces, subjected to a puncture test, engulfed in fire and submerged in water. So far, in some 2,600 shipments of spent fuel rods since the mid-60's, there have been only four truck accidents and four rail accidents, with no release of radioactive material. There is no question that the transportation issues will need to be explored in great depth — to make sure that the tests conducted on the casks are strenuous enough, that the probabilities of serious accidents have been reasonably and conservatively calculated and that the new threat of terrorism can be countered. But the appropriate place for those issues to be addressed is in painstaking regulatory proceedings before the N.R.C., not in rushed Congressional debate now. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 13 Hewson's Sellafield bid snubbed by Blair April 21, 2002 Nicola Byrne ALI HEWSON’S much-vaunted postcard campaign to shut Sellafield is in danger of flopping. The British media have largely ignored the campaign, in which about 1m Irish people are petitioning the prime minister with postcards calling for the closure of the nuclear processing plant. In a withering dismissal of Hewson’s campaign, a spokesman for Downing Street said last week: “We’re not particularly concerned about this.” Hewson, who is married to Bono of U2, has hired her husband’s public relations firm, RMP, to rally support in Britain. Executives from the company have been contacting journalists in Britain asking them to cover the campaign. The support of Irish bands the Corrs and the Cranberries, and Ken Doherty, the snooker player, has raised the profile of the campaign in Ireland. But the Daily Mail, one of the few British newspapers to cover the campaign, accused Hewson of attempting to deprive 10,000 Sellafield workers of their jobs. Sinead Walsh, a spokesman for the Shut Sellafield campaign, admits there has been little British interest in the crusade to date. She predicts this will change once the cards start arriving in Downing Street from next Friday. “This is a huge demonstration by the Irish people and the British can’t ignore that,” she said. The deadline for posting the cards has been extended until tomorrow. The cards will be collected and held in a sorting office in Dublin until Thursday, from where they will be taken to London. Cards addressed to Prince Charles and the head of British Nuclear Fuels, Norman Askew, will continue to be on sale for one euro and can be posted at any time. Hewson’s advisers are currently considering their next move in the campaign. “We’re not just going to go away after the postcards are sent,” said Lindsey Holmes yesterday. “We’ll continue to agitate until we get some results.” They hope the support of the entire Irish football squad will boost the profile of the Shut Sellafield campaign in Britain, where most of the team are based. Campaigners have also drawn some hope from remarks by Michael Meacher, the British environment minister, last month that people were right to be concerned about radioactive waste from the plant. The minister, renowned for his frankness, made the comment at a conference in Norway. The Norwegian government is supporting Irish government efforts to close Sellafield. On Friday, Brian Wilson, a British government minister, criticised An Post for co-ordinating the delivery of the postcard petitions. He said “the national postal service of a friendly neighbouring country” should not get involved in demonstrations of this nature. He said people should be sceptical of what they are being asked to put their names to. John Foley, head of communications at An Post, said that as the country’s postal authority, it is obliged to deliver cards. “An Post also has the freedom to support organisations causes or initiatives,” he said. Tony Blair has steadfastly refused to comment on Hewson’s campaign, but has reiterated his support for British Nuclear Fuels, which runs Sellafield. Ireland’s protest begins at the same time as the European parliament is inviting citizens to express its views on a report outlining the threat of toxic dangers from Sellafield and Cap de la Hague, in France. The report, entitled Possible toxic effects from the nuclear reprocessing plants at Sellafield and Cap de la Hague, paints a picture of the disaster which could follow an accident in the high-level waste tanks at the plants, as well as the health risks posed by the two plants’ day-to-day activities. Hewson said the greater risk of terrorist attack and concerns about Sellafield’s outdated high-level liquid waste tanks increased public concerns about the plant. “Everyone in Ireland totally respects Tony Blair for all he’s done in Northern Ireland but they don’t like the fact that he’s standing behind BNFL and Sellafield, putting our children at unnecessary risk,” she said. Avril Doyle, a Fine Gael MEP, has called on the European parliament to take the threat of a terrorist attack on Sellafield seriously: “Before September 11, I would have laughed at the suggestion, but the game has changed since then. We need experts to try to quantify the increased risk of a terrorist attack on Sellafield.” ***************************************************************** 14 Littwin: S.C. guv prefers going flat to Rocky Flats Rocky Mountain News: Columnists April 20, 2002 I'm violating the first rule of column writing, which is, if you want someone to actually read the column, never use the words rocky and flats consecutively. But there is another rule, which overrides the first rule and goes like this: If the governor of a state threatens to lie down in the middle of the highway to block a convoy of trucks carrying weapons-grade plutonium from your state to his, you can write Rocky Flats until the plutonium comes home (which you pray it never does). Jim Hodges, the South Carolina governor, has made just that vow. And it gets better than that. On Monday, the state of South Carolina -- hereafter known as the dumpee -- will conduct an exercise/photo op, in which state troopers practice stopping the convoy at the state borders. This is street theater from a governor, who, I'm told, is not a street theater kind of guy. Picture Bill Owens lying on the highway and you get the idea just how weird this is. You know what we have here. Think Civil War redux. Except with nuclear weapons. Or maybe Smokey and the Bandit VI. If the Bandit was hauling plutonium. Now, there are some problems for South Carolina, which could see the first trucks rolling down I-95 any time after May 14. Actually, seeing the trucks could be one of the problems. The Department of Energy uses heavily armed stealth trucks. The energy boys don't tell you when and they don't tell you how. Although there is a rumor that if you see an outsized Miller truck with the logo "More Nuclear Waste, Less Filling," then you might be onto something. And the other thing is that the U.S. government could call out the marshals or maybe even the Army to take on the state troopers, who, if outmanned, would not be defenseless. Whatever they lack in firepower, they make up in mirror sunglasses. This is a states-rights battle like none seen in a great while in a state in which they know something about civil wars. OK, we have to sort of explain the issue. As everyone knows, they're turning Rocky Flats into a wildlife refuge, and wildlife, like humans, does poorly around too much plutonium. They've got to dump the stuff somewhere and South Carolina is a traditional dumping ground. At some point -- OK, years -- after the plutonium arrives at Savannah River Site, it is supposed to be mixed with uranium and converted into something called MOX (mixed oxide fuel) to be used in nuclear power plants. Not everyone believes this will -- or can -- happen. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has expressed concern. Duke Energy Corp., which is supposed to use the MOX, has expressed concern. And the Russians figure into this somehow as well. It's better if you don't know. Hodges has actually agreed to take the plutonium but has demanded an exit strategy, in order to eventually get rid of the stuff. And he wants it in writing. And he wants penalties if the government decides, many years later, it isn't really interested in taking the plutonium off South Carolina's hands. You don't have to be a student of energy policy to know that no one, as in no one, wants nuclear waste. Sen. Wayne Allard, a Republican, and Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, a Republican, have spent the past nine months or so negotiating this issue with Hodges, a Democrat. According to Allard, Hodges has basically won -- saying he has his assurances, and that Allard is willing to put them into law -- but refuses to claim victory, saying that legislation isn't good enough. Hodges wants the issue settled in court -- while, presumably, the plutonium remains at Rocky Flats instead of South Carolina, where it would sit until at least 2007. And so the name-calling, as so often in the world of convoys, has begun. Hodges has accused Allard of politicizing the issue, saying Allard needs Rocky Flats cleaned up for his race with Tom Strickland. Allard says Hodges has been running on the don't-dump-on-me issue for months. Allard press secretary Sean Conway said of Hodges: "We have put together legislation that will codify the agreement. Everyone is on the same page except the governor. He's the one who continues to posture on this issue." And then, just to make it personal: "I've talked to people in South Carolina and you know what his nickname is? Elmer Fudd. He's not regarded as the best and brightest down there." Conway says Hodges is isolated in his own state. But that's not what I heard from South Carolina Democrats. And the South Carolina Sierra Club has offered to join Hodges on the highway. Dell Isham, South Carolina chapter director, said Hodges told them, "Would you mind lying down in front of me?" And if the story isn't strange enough for you yet, it might help to know 75 percent of the plutonium going to South Carolina actually originated in South Carolina. Which makes me wonder what people here in Colorado would say if the trucks were coming the other way. My guess is this: Good luck, pal, getting past TREX. Mike Littwin's column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. Call him at (303) 892-5428 or e-mail him at littwinm@RockyMountainNews.com. © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 15 Radioactive: Prepare goodbyes for Flats plutonium Rocky Mountain News: Opinion April 21, 2002 The issue: Will Flats' plutonium finally be shipped? Our view: Believe it or not, it looks that way To appreciate how silly the governor of South Carolina has been acting over the impending shipment of Rocky Flats plutonium to his state, consider his pledge -- reiterated last week -- that he would lie down in the road if necessary to block the trucks. This is sheer bluster, of course -- unless Gov. Jim Hodges intends to park himself perpetually in front of the Savannah River facility. Otherwise, how will he know when a shipment is about to arrive? The federal government certainly isn't about to alert him -- or anyone else, for that matter. Preserving secrecy is one way in which federal officials also ensure security for the shipments. Hodges is grandstanding, pure and simple. It makes for great political sport when the stakes aren't high -- but the stakes are in fact very high in this case. It's not only the projected closing of Rocky Flats by Dec. 15, 2006 that would be delayed and even jeopardized if Hodges were permitted to succeed at his political game. Were his stubbornness to succeed, it could threaten the fulfillment of international treaties as well. An agreement between the U.S. and Russia, for example, requires this each nation to dispose of enough plutonium, in Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's words, "to make over 4,200 nuclear weapons." Last week, fortunately, Abraham's patience ran out and he signed papers giving a 30-day notice for shipments to begin from Rocky Flats to Savannah River; and they'll begin whether the South Carolina governor likes it or not. Federalism is a vital American principle, but here we're talking about plutonium manufactured for national defense that will be shipped from one federal facility to another. A state official simply can't be allowed to veto a national program that cleans up radioactive materials. Two members of Colorado's congressional delegation -- Republican Sen. Wayne Allard and Democratic Rep. Mark Udall -- played a key role in keeping the pressure on the Bush administration to act. Allard's role has been particularly forceful, and included a speech before a Senate subcommittee in which he contrasted the interstate cooperation of the Manhattan Project 60 years ago with the short-sighted parochial behavior of a few states today. "Instead of following the proud vision and model of the Manhattan Project," Allard noted, "the governor of South Carolina has decided to play politics. As a result of his dangerous gamesmanship, our nation's security and our nation's environmental security have been placed at risk." The irony is that the plutonium isn't even going to be stored permanently in South Carolina. It will be processed into reactor fuel. The energy secretary offered Hodges virtually every possible guarantee that the processing plant would indeed be built, but he simply wouldn't be be satisfied. Abraham's action actually takes Hodges off the hook. He can still act silly, but now the only harm it will do is to his reputation. © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 16 Some rays of reason for Congress Sunday, April 21, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal COLUMN: Thomas Mitchell New York Times columnist and three-time Pulitzer Prize winner Thomas Friedman notes there are two kinds of columnists, those who work for the heating company and those who work for the lighting company. He prefers to bring light. There may be a time and place for blood-boiling rhetoric, but it usually just ends up marginalizing its proponents. On the other hand, the white light of reason may not be able to plumb the depths of ignorance and self-delusion. Sort of like the Yucca Mountain debate. This year's gathering of the American Society of Newspaper Editors coincided with Gov. Kenny Guinn's jaunt to D.C. to veto the presidential decree naming Yucca Mountain as the nation's sole repository of high-level nuclear waste. I did double duty and managed to meet up with the governor and his entourage on their first evening in town, then attended both a morning press conference with the Washington delegation on the grounds of the Capitol and a noon scientific briefing at the National Press Club. I found more light than heat. When it comes right down to it, the dispassionate anti-Yucca Mountain arguments are convincing -- from a scientific, legal, political and homeland security point of view. Look at the basic premise: Find a geologic formation that can safely isolate nuclear waste for 10,000 years. Recorded history is only 5,000 years, and science has not yet shown an ability to forecast earthquakes and volcanoes next week, never mind 10 millennia into the future. And why 10,000 years? By some estimates, the stuff remains hazardous for up to 800,000 years. The governor also points out the Department of Energy computer models of Yucca Mountain have uncertainty factors of up to 10,000. He compares it to buying a car with brakes guaranteed for 10,000 miles, plus or minus a factor of 10,000. They might last 100 million miles or one mile. We've been reporting for some time that the DOE is relying more and more on canisters to isolate the waste, but the hard numbers were a bit eye opening. According to the government's own data the "relative contribution of waste isolation barriers" is: Waste package (canisters), 99.7 percent. Spent fuel cladding, 0.2 percent. Yucca Mountain overburden, 0.09 percent. Yucca Mountain geology, 0.008 percent. Sounds like a good argument for the courts. Congress dictated geologic repository, but it ain't geologic any more. If the canisters are mostly what keeps it safe, the stuff can be stored anywhere. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham argued in an opinion piece we carried on the op-ed page that the waste is safer at one site than in the 131 sites at which it is now stored. To which is replied: Waste at those 131 sites is about 46,000 tons now, and because plants continue to operate, waste levels will never fall below 42,000 tons by the time Yucca Mountain reaches its 77,000-ton capacity. Thus, the country would have 132 nuclear waste sites, plus somewhere between 50,000 and 100,00 nuclear waste shipments. Later in the week at an ASNE luncheon, I asked Homeland Security czar Tom Ridge about the risks to waste sites and shipments. The topic apparently had not made much of blip on his radar screen. Ridge started by talking about the years of study and billions of dollars spent over several administrations, and concluded, "We feel very confident that this can be done safely," noting shipping should not be "an impediment" to a permanent waste site. Asked a follow-up about the risk of terrorism, the former Pennsylvania governor said security would be ramped up to counter someone getting their hands on the radioactive material to "deploy" against us. "I think we can deal with it." Specific comparative risk analysis? Not mentioned. The possibility of a terrorist blowing up a shipment en route? Did not seem to occur to him. Speaking of Pennsylvania, Gov. Guinn noted that nowhere in the 67 pounds of Yucca Mountain documents sent to the president was any mention of a deal DOE cut with Pennsylvania's PECO Energy to take possession of its nuke waste and store it at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant, solving both the transportation and the company's legal liability issues. So these are some of the rays of reason for Congress, the courts and the people, instead of hot-headed threats to lie down in front of the nuke waste trucks. Come to think of it, that might be a win-win situation. If the trucks stop, we win. If they don't ... Thomas Mitchell, editor of the Review-Journal, writes a column on the newspaper's functions and role in the community. He may be reached at 383-0261 or via e-mail at tmitchell@reviewjournal.com. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 17 Yucca: Bad! That's a bad Jon Porter! Bad! Sunday, April 21, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal COLUMN: Steve Sebelius Clark County Commissioner Dario Herrera Friday lambasted his rival for the 3rd Congressional District, state Sen. Jon Porter, saying Porter's acceptance of money from House leaders who support Yucca Mountain sends a terrible message to "Nevada families." That assumes "Nevada families" actually think Yucca Mountain can be stopped, or that they would never vote for someone who accepted money from a dump supporter, both of which are wrong. "On Yucca Mountain, there can be no compromise. There can be no bargaining," a resolute Herrera said from the windswept lectern at the Lloyd D. George federal courthouse. "The House GOP leaders are no friends to Nevada families." And, he added, "the anti-Nevada House leadership is pouring money into his (Porter's) campaign like there's no tomorrow." But the one question Herrera couldn't answer was this: How does accepting money from the likes of House Speaker Dennis Hastert, House Majority Whip Tom DeLay or House Majority Leader Richard Armey compromise Porter's opposition to the dump? Answer: It doesn't. Still, it's good politics. We're told constantly by campaign finance reform opponents that donors are not trying to buy elections, they're simply giving money to people who share their views. If that's so, Porter must love nuclear waste the way Herrera loves news conferences. But Porter will never vote for the dump. He's argued with those very House leaders about the issue (no doubt as they're handing him their checks). And next week, he'll testify against transporting nuclear waste across country. If those donations were intended to buy his silence, the leaders should ask for a refund. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to refuse contributions from Hastert, DeLay and Armey, not the least of which is their support for a Republican energy plan that calls for more nuclear power and drilling for oil on just about every street corner in America. On that, Porter is vulnerable. Tellingly, Herrera didn't extend his criticism to U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, who once took money from "Screw Nevada" author, the former Louisiana Sen. J. Bennett Johnston. Instead, Herrera defended Reid at his news conference, saying Reid is doing everything he can to fight Yucca. And that, says Porter, is the point: No one questions Reid's commitment to battling nuclear waste. "(The contributions are) not going to change my 20-plus years of fighting nuclear waste," he says. But let's get real: The fight is over, and the point is moot. Those House leaders who've been so generous to Porter have scheduled a vote to override Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto for this summer, long before the Nov. 5 election determines whether Jon Porter or Dario Herrera will be a congressman. c There was some confusion about how much Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman has personally donated to the Yucca fight. Goodman claimed this week through a city spokeswoman that he'd given $1,250 to a city fund. The fund, Goodman said, had been established at least a year ago. But that's not exactly true. The fund was actually established March 28, specifically to receive $1,250 that had been pledged by The Great Steak and Potato Company, a Meadows Mall cheesesteak franchise. Goodman worked for about an hour on March 9 grilling cheesesteaks and working the cash register, after owner Brian Slipock called Goodman and offered to donate a day's profits in exchange for a mayoral visit. The $1,250 was the fruit of that labor, not Goodman's personal cash. The mayor insists that because he donated his time and talents, the money counts as a personal donation. (An hour's work for $1,250? Talk about your living wage!) And while you can argue Goodman's celebrity attracted diners (and thus donors) the answer to the question about how much Goodman had personally donated as of the beginning of last week was: nothing. But that doesn't mean the mayor's a piker, either. At the Clark County Democratic Party convention April 13, Goodman pledge to match all anti-Yucca money collected from delegates. On Thursday, he wrote his check, for $386.52. And that's the truth. Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. His column runs Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. Reach him at 383-0283 or by e-mail at ssebelius@reviewjournal.com. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 18 Yucca editorial: Nuclear Waste The Salt Lake Tribune -- Nuclear Waste Sunday, April 21, 2002 The editorial (Tribune, April 15) asserts that reprocessing high-level radioactive "waste" is preferable to permanent burial at Yucca Mountain, citing the examples of other countries which reprocess spent fuel from commercial nuclear power plants. That sets aside for now the question of the other high-level radioactive waste from defense programs stored at government sites. Reprocessing is not precluded in the Department of Energy (DOE) plan for Yucca Mountain. DOE would store the material there in a single site (instead of 131 sites) for between 125 to 300 years, during which time it would be required by the terms of the license for the facility to be able to retrieve any or all waste packages from the tunnels for any reason, including a future determination that reprocessing makes economic, environmental and engineering sense and does not complicate the non-proliferation concerns that caused President Carter to put the kabash on reprocessing in the 1970s. The Bush Energy Plan affirms that revisiting the reprocessing issue is in order. Bear in mind, though, that present schemes for reprocessing do not eliminate the need to dispose of some smaller amount of less long-lived radioactive waste products. Second, since it is presumably uneconomic to reprocess at all 131 sites, there would still need to be transportation to several regional reprocessing sites (yet to be selected) that would be operating for as much as 100 years to reprocess all the material. (There was a detailed report on this prepared for Congress by DOE in 1999.) A lot of people intuitively feel that reprocessing is more efficient use of energy resources, but it still requires some form of permanent disposal facility. All other countries with nuclear facilities, including those that reprocess, are planning similar underground repositories and are watching carefully how this country proceeds on both technical and social acceptance fronts. For your information, Japan seeks to have a repository operational in 2040. BRIAN O'CONNELL Director, Nuclear Waste Program Office National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Washington, D.C. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune ***************************************************************** 19 Utah Will Be a Nuclear Dump Forever If Production Persists The Salt Lake Tribune -- Sunday, April 21, 2002 BY CRAIG AXFORD A recent Deseret News/Dan Jones poll found that while the vast majority of Utahns oppose storing nuclear waste in Tooele County, only 24 percent oppose plans to store high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The weak opposition to Yucca Mountain appears to be based in large part on the perception of Yucca Mountain as a "permanent solution" to our nation's nuclear waste problem. This perception is fueled by the consistent claims of Gov. Mike Leavitt and Utah's congressional delegation that the Skull Valley nuclear waste proposal is "redundant" because Yucca Mountain will soon be able to take all of the country's nuclear waste. Unfortunately, Yucca Mountain is as "permanent" a solution as Skull Valley is a "temporary storage facility." A quick review of the facts with regard to our growing nuclear waste problem reveals the falsehood of both claims. Yucca Mountain, if opened, would receive 77,000 metric tons of nuclear waste. Ten percent of this waste would come from the Department of Defense, leaving Yucca Mountain capable of only receiving approximately 67,000 metric tons of the waste generated by the nation's commercial nuclear power plants. By 2010, a good five to 10 years before Yucca Mountain is likely to be ready to receive waste, the United States will have generated a total of 60,000 tons of nuclear waste. Assuming nuclear waste production does not increase, as it would under the Bush energy plan, the United States will be generating an additional 2,000 tons of waste annually at that time, leaving us with a total of 80,000 tons by 2020. That's a good 13,000 tons more than Yucca Mountain can handle. The Skull Valley "temporary" storage site supported by some members of the Goshute tribe and Private Fuel Storage (PFS), a consortium of nuclear power plants looking for somewhere to dump their waste, is being sold to the public as a good place to put nuclear waste until Yucca Mountain is up and running. Unfortunately, about the time the PFS site's 20-year permit expires, we will have more waste than Yucca Mountain can handle. PFS would, under the proposal being considered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, enjoy the option of extending its permit for an additional 20 years. When PFS's second 20-year storage permit expired around 2040, the United States would have approximately 53,000 tons more waste than Yucca Mountain is designed to handle. Unless PFS were willing to take back the 40,000 tons stored at Skull Valley at that time, it seems highly unlikely the Skull Valley site would be as temporary as its supporters claim. Given the obvious growing nuclear waste problem in the United States over the next half century, why are Utah's political leaders willing to support Yucca Mountain as a "permanent solution" that renders Skull Valley redundant? Similarly, given the facts, why are PFS and its backers willing to mislead the public by claiming Skull Valley is temporary when there will obviously be no room at Yucca Mountain for all the waste Skull Valley will receive over the life of the storage permit? Utah's political leaders should be standing with Nevada in opposition to Yucca Mountain because both states have everything to lose and nothing to gain by accepting nuclear waste. As Western states with a great deal of public desert lands, both Utah and Nevada will continue to be targets of the nuclear industry well into the future unless we are willing to cooperate in resisting the Yucca Mountain and Skull Valley proposals now. Instead, Utah's leaders have opted to support additional nuclear power plants and the extension of existing nuclear power plant licenses by endorsing President Bush's energy policy. This puts Rep. Jim Hansen, Gov. Leavitt and others in the awkward position of supporting the production of more waste while simultaneously fighting storage in Utah. As Green Party candidates, we recognize the first step toward solving a problem is to stop making it worse. The United States must adopt an energy policy that reduces and ultimately eliminates our reliance on nuclear power by supporting conservation efforts and investing in renewable energy development such as wind and solar power. Only when the production of nuclear waste ceases can a true "permanent solution" to the nuclear waste problem be found. In the meantime, we stand with Nevada in its effort to prevent the shipment of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, and we appreciate the fact that Nevada has so far supported Utah in its attempts to prevent high-level nuclear waste from coming to our state. We recognize the fact that both our states have relatively small congressional delegations, and only together can we keep the nation's nuclear waste from coming to the Western deserts of the United States. Craig Axford is the Green Party candidate for Utah's 1st Congressional District. His comments are supported by fellow Green Party hopefuls David Rowland, state Senate District 22; Diana Lee Hirshi, Salt Lake County Council at large; Laura Bonham, Legislative District 53; Patrick Beecroft, Salt Lake County Council District 1; Peter Hines, Legislative District 8; Linda Parsons, Legislative District 34; and Rob Morrison, Legislative District 3. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune ***************************************************************** 20 Sellafield faces 'illegal state aid' probe Irish Newspapers - Protest: Ali Hewson BNFL faces an EU investigation into alleged illegal state aid as calls grew last week for an end to massive tax write-offs from the British exchequer. The renewed pressure on the finances of the Sellafield operator comes after demands from Irish MEPs that it should not receive any financial assistance from taxpayers in Britain or elsewhere. It also comes just as the postcard campaign, led by Ali Hewson wife of U2 lead singer Bono aimed at closing Sellafield, comes to a climax. After a special hearing in the European Parliament on the Sellafield reprocessing complex, MEPs claimed it was hypocritical for the EU to block any Irish state aid for Aer Lingus and yet turn a blind eye to assistance for British Nuclear Fuels Limited. This weekend, a spokesman for the nuclear firm flatly rejected any suggestion that it receives state aid. "It's true to say we're 100 per cent government-owned, but all our payments are through commercial loans. We don't receive any form of state aid. We operate like a public limited company," he said. The Green MEP, Nuala Ahern and Fine Gael's Avril Doyle challenged this on separate grounds. Ms Ahern submitted a lengthy dossier and financial analysis on the firm to the European Commission's Competition Commissioner, Mario Monti last month. His officials have confirmed they are examining her conclusions that the succession of tax write-offs to the firm amounted to an illegal state aid. Ms Ahern also challenged the auditing practices at the group, which continues to lose money. Despite the comments from BNFL, the British Government last year agreed to write off stg£473m ({ðE}670m) on the development of the new MOX facility at the Sellafield complex in Cumbria. The UK agreed to immediately write-off stg£274m ({ðE}388m) against the development. The legal base for this move is now being challenged. CONOR SWEENEY European Editor in Brussels © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 21 Tailing dumps in south Kyrgyzstan endanger region - OSCE BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 20, 2002 [Presenter] The Kyrgyz permanent representative in the Eurasian Economic Community, Bazarbay Mambetov, has had a meeting with the head of the OSCE Bishkek centre, Aydin Idil. During the conversation the sides discussed the issues relating to reclamation of tailing dumps in Mayli-Say [western Kyrgyzstan]. It was pointed out that there are about 2m cubic metres of radioactive compounds there, 15-20 per cent of them uranium. Of 35 tailing dumps in the republic, 23 are located in Mayli-Say. According to environmental experts it is necessary to prevent landslides, which could lead to an environmental catastrophe in the Fergana valley, where more than 10m people of three countries live [Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan]. The OSCE intends to carry out research into these problems in order to draw the attention of the European Union and the World Bank to them. Source: Kyrgyz Radio first programme, Bishkek, in Russian 1100 gmt 19 Apr 02 /© BBC Monitoring ***************************************************************** 22 Stars go postal to defuse nuclear threat Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Amelia Hill Sunday April 21, 2002 The Observer [http://www.observer.co.uk] Tony Blair and Prince Charles are to be targeted by almost every household in the Republic of Ireland in the largest environmental protest ever mounted by one nation against its neighbour. In a campaign masterminded by Ali Hewson, the wife of U2 singer Bono, millions of pre-paid postcards demanding the closure of the Sellafield nuclear plant will be posted to Britain this week. They have been delivered to every one of Ireland's 1.3 million households over the past month, backed by a massive nationwide media campaign. Newspapers, TV and radio stations have urged residents to send the cards directly to the Prime Minister, the Prince of Wales and executives at British Nuclear Fuels, which runs Sellafield. 'The support has been absolutely amazing,' said Hewson. 'Any celebrity we have asked to help has just jumped at the chance.' The cards, which picture an eye and the words: 'Tony, look me in the eye and tell me I'm safe,' are due to be posted to Britain on Friday, the sixteenth anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster. Some observers believe the sheer volume of protest mail could bring chaos to the postal system. 'The British Government has ignored our concerns about this and we have had enough,' said Hewson. 'We will make this an election issue and if we do not make them listen this year, we will come back next year and the year after: this is an unending campaign.' Hewson, whose home in Co Dublin faces Sellafield across the Irish Sea, added: 'I have four children and I want to know they are safe. But my concerns are also global: there are 75 tons of plutonium in Sellafield. If there is an accident or it is targeted by terrorists, it is not just the people of Ireland who will suffer and not just the people of Britain but those throughout Europe and further afield.' The postcards will be collected and posted free by An Post, the Irish postal service. But while the government and politicians have been keen to jump on board the campaign, Hewson is determined to ensure the voice of her protest is a predominantly civil one. 'This is an issue of acute, personal concern to every Irish resident and it is a shock and a disgrace that even though we live in an anti-nuclear country, we have no say in this issue,' she said. 'This is our chance to let the ordinary men and women of this country make their feelings known at the breakfast tables of the most influential people in Britain.' Hewson has been involved in the anti-nuclear movement since travelling to Chernobyl in 1993 to make a documentary. Her campaign is backed by musicians such as the Corrs, Ronan Keating and Samantha Mumba. Other supporters include actor Colin Farrell and Manchester United captain Roy Keane. Sellafield has been the subject of many complaints by the Irish government and environmentalists. In February, hundreds of protesters brought chaos to the roads of Cumbria, claiming the plant was to blame for miscarriages and child leukaemia along Ireland's eastern coast. Campaigners also say it is responsible for destroying marine life and presents a major risk from accidents or terrorist attack. 21.04.2002: Related article: Ali Hewson on the nuclear threat from Sellafield [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 23 Russian nuclear-powered submarine is back in service BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 21, 2002 Severodvinsk, 21 April: Russia's strategic nuclear submarine Yekaterinburg, Project 667 BDRM, has been put back in the water at the Zvezdochka shipyards in Severodvinsk on Sunday [21 April]. The submarine's mooring trials are to begin in September and running trials in December 2002, an Interfax corespondent has reported. The shipyards' General Director, Nikolay Kalistratov, has told Interfax that "after repairs the submarine may be used by the Russian navy for a minimum of ten-fifteen years." "The submarine has been put through normal repairs during which all of its mechanisms and facilities were given a new life," Kalistratov said. Source: Interfax news agency, Moscow, in English 0623 gmt 21 Apr 02 /© BBC Monitoring ***************************************************************** 24 Morocco calls for a nuclear-arms-free zone in mideast Morocco-Regional, Politics, 4/20/2002 Morocco has renewed its call on nuclear powers, especially the signatories of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of the Nuclear Weapons (NPT), for the creation of a nuclear-arms-free zone in the Middle East. The call was made in a report to the United Nations Committee preparing for a 2005 conference of the parties to NPT, which is currently meeting at the United Nations headquarters in New York. "The creation of such a zone requires that Israel, sole state in the region that has not yet joined the NPT, adhere to the convention and submit its nuclear installations to the system of the International Atomic Energy, said Morocco. Morocco adhered to the NPT in 1970, although it does not have nuclear capacities. "Morocco was one of the first countries to call for the creation of a nuclear-arms-free zone in the Middle East, because it believes that such a zone is not only a necessary to avoid proliferation and insecurity in this region but is also an international objective and a factor for the consolidation of peace and security in the world," the report said. Morocco is also signatory of the Pelindaba Treaty on a nuclear-arms-free zone in Africa. Copyright © 1995-2001 Arabic News.com, All Rights [webmaster@ArabicNews.com] . ArabicNews.com and ArabicNews are ***************************************************************** 25 Govt should promote wind power Daily Yomiuri On-Line Yuichi Shibata Growing awareness about the importance of reducing greenhouse gases has provided a tailwind for a campaign to increase wind-generated power worldwide. However, Japan has been slow to jump on the bandwagon. To raise the output of wind-generated electricity, the government must take the lead in aiding wind-power generation programs using financial and other methods. In Europe, the wind-power market is growing as fast as the cellular-phone market. Germany, a nation dedicated to the growth of wind-power generation, saw its wind-power generation expand by 44 percent in 2001 from the previous year to 8.75 million kilowatts, equivalent to eight nuclear reactors. Wind-power generation is gradually increasing in Japan, but the country's annual output still hovers around just 300,000 kilowatts--equal to Germany's capacity 10 years ago. What is the difference between Japan and Germany? Most windmills now being built in Europe have blade diameters of 70 meters and power-generation capacities of 2,000 kilowatts. The bigger a windmill's capacity, the cheaper it can produce power. This means windmills should be as large as possible. Technological innovation has enabled the creation of large, strong blades made with a light glass-fiber tempered plastic. Modern windmills also use special bolts that can withstand the power of strong winds. A superwindmill, having a sail 150 meters in diameter is technologically feasible. A test windmill with a 114-meter sail was completed in Germany last year. Large windmills with blade diameters of 66 meters have been constructed in Akita Prefecture and Hokkaido, but 80 meters is considered to be the maximum diameter for windmills in Japan, given limited land space and narrow roads, which hamper the transportation of large components. Few wide roads lead to remote regions where windmills can be constructed without inconveniencing local communities. Denmark, which leads the world in wind-power generation, is building windmills at sea because the country is small and lacks available land. Offshore windmills pose no hazards, however large they may be. Furthermore, windmills built out in the ocean get consistent winds. Constructing offshore windmills would seem to be a good idea for Japan, which is surrounded by water. However, no concrete plans for offshore windmills have been submitted so far as there are still many problems to be cleared, such as legal restrictions, compensation for fishermen and establishing new shipping lanes that bypass windmill sites. Local governments facing Tokyo Bay and private companies once jointly studied a project to build a windmill with a capacity of 2,000 kilowatts in Tokyo Bay off Makuhari, Chiba Prefecture. However, the Chiba prefectural government hesitated to get involved in the scheme for fear of losing money. Offshore commercial wind-power generation is also challenged by weather problems. Japan has complex topographic features that make offshore winds turbulent. In addition, Japan's coasts are frequently hit by typhoons and sudden gusts of wind. Strong winds on the Japan Sea coast in winter would impose enormous pressures on windmill blades. Strong winds take their toll on windmills like body blows do to boxers and the blades eventually become fatigued and fragile. In Europe, where the weather is relatively stable, such severe meteorological conditions do not exist. European-made blades, which account for 80 percent of those used for Japanese windmills, are said to frequently develop cracks and are easily damaged by lightning. Japanese windmill makers are not keen to carve out a domestic market because they are well aware of the winds in Japan and do not expect to receive mass orders domestically. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Co., the sole Japanese maker of large wind power systems, exports 90 percent of its windmills to the United States. Japanese windmill makers insist that Japan should promote the research and development of a wind-power generation system suitable for the country's climate. However, the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry's organization for the comprehensive development of new energy and industrial technology is expected to suspend research support to wind-power generation at the end of fiscal 2003 on the grounds that wind-power generation has reached the stage where it can be practically applied. However, the government still needs to continue to support wind-power generation if it wants to see wind-power generation become an important energy source. Japanese electric power companies are reluctant to purchase expensive wind-generated power. Prof. Izumi Ushiyama of Ashikaga Institute of Technology said wind power caught on in Europe because the governments of European countries required utility companies to purchase electricity from windmills. "Like European countries, Japan should require utilities to purchase wind-generated power," he argued. Now is the time for utility companies to focus on environmental preservation even if they have to pay higher costs. It remains to be seen, however, how determined the government will be to support this project. Copyright 2002 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 26 Playing With Energy (washingtonpost.com) By George F. Will Sunday, April 21, 2002; Page B07 Developments involving two desolate places and one lush one -- the fertile Midwest -- demonstrate how Congress plays with energy policy. Herewith a story of sexually ardent caribou, a governor vetoing a presidential decision in order to defend the sweetness of rural Nevada, and the political imperatives behind putting corn in your gas tank. Although there is drilling for oil and gas in 29 wildlife refuges, the most fiercely contested question about the energy bill was about drilling on one-hundredth of 1 percent of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which is described, by people more passionately devoted to preserving it than visiting it, as "pristine." Yes, and the moon's surface is pristine. Except ANWR is less so, because the moon does not have -- as ANWR's coastal plain, where the drilling would have occurred, does -- roads, military installations, an airstrip, a school, houses, stores. ANWR could produce at least 1.3 million barrels a day for 25 years, almost what we import from Saudi Arabia. The House of Representatives voted for drilling, but it lost in the Senate, which is the habitat of Democratic presidential candidates who burnish their environmental credentials by jumping through the hoop of opposition to ANWR drilling. Some senators said that drilling would interfere with the reproduction of caribou. However, the herds have tripled in the three decades since opponents of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline said it would interfere with the caribou's reproduction. Many caribou even cluster around the heated pipeline, perhaps just for warmth, perhaps to do things from which a gentleman would avert his gaze. Many opponents of ANWR drilling favor mandating higher fuel efficiency for cars and trucks, which means lighter and less-safe vehicles. The National Academy of Sciences says existing standards contribute to 1,300 to 2,600 deaths -- and 10 times that many serious injuries -- every year. Nevertheless, stricter standards are favored by many people who were scandalized when President Bush temporarily suspended implementation of new regulations requiring even more reduction of arsenic in water. The Environmental Protection Agency estimated the regulations might save 28 lives a year. Saving Nevada for the next Democratic presidential candidate (Bush carried it by 21,597 out of 608,970 votes cast), and perhaps winning two House seats this year are the Democrats' goals in opposing the use of Nevada's Yucca Mountain facility for storing nuclear waste. Nevadans are opposed to this use. A lot more Americans are not: 160 million of them live within 75 miles of one of the 131 locations in 39 states where nuclear waste is stored. For 50 years the government has studied what to do with nuclear waste, which now amounts to 77,000 tons. For 15 years it has studied Yucca Mountain, which is 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, which fears that President Bush's decision to use Yucca Mountain will . . . what? That city's business is the satiation of various cravings of visitors who are not apt to avoid the city because nuclear waste is buried 90 miles away, 1,000 feet underground and resting on 1,000 feet of rock. However, 20 years ago Congress provided a mechanism by which governors of states to which a president directs nuclear waste can conduct a minuet of defiance by vetoing a presidential directive. Majorities in both houses of Congress can then override the veto. Among Nevada's allies are Democrats interested in making Nevada feel put upon by Bush. Also, people phobic about things nuclear, who stress putative dangers of transporting nuclear waste to Nevada, understand that the failure to solve the problem of waste disposal is one reason why no nuclear power generating plant has been built in a quarter of a century. In the autumn of 2000 the price of gasoline went up a bit, an inconvenience for candidate Al Gore, so the Clinton administration, which felt the pain of a nation that has a low pain threshold when in the proximity of gasoline pumps, pumped oil out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which exists to protect the nation against major interruptions of supply, not to knock a few nickels off the price of gasoline during a presidential election. For this election season, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of corn-producing South Dakota proposes substantially increasing requirements for putting corn-based ethanol, for spurious clean-air reasons, in gasoline sold in various parts of the country. Democrats are trying to hold hotly contested Senate seats in South Dakota, Minnesota, Missouri and Iowa. And a regularly recurring mental illness, Iowa Caucuses Dementia, which caused candidate Bush to become an ethanol subsidy enthusiast, afflicts the herd of Democratic presidential aspirants, which probably includes Daschle. Absent an energy crisis, this is how energy policy is made. And this is how an energy crisis is made more likely. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************