DOCSLIB.ORG

Retroactivist Course Not

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Retroactivist Course Not A publication of Nuclear Information and Resource Service MAYJUNE 2006 Volume II: issue 4 ISSN 1556-8822 Iran Irony Linda’s Log non-proliferation groups are rightly working hard to persuade the The U.S. government not to use military might to end Iran’s uranium Meaning Nenrichment program. Meanwhile, those of us concerned with the of proposed proliferation of new nuclear reactors - as well as plans to build Green? a new uranium enrichment facility of our own in New Mexico - can’t help but smile at the irony. No better example of the inextricable bond between nuclear power and nuclear weapons could have emerged than the situation Th e fi ve-minute environmentalist, in Iran. For decades the International Atomic Energy Agency has upheld Patrick Moore, also dubbed the disingenous philosophy that splitting the atom to turn the lights on is “plastic surgeon to the polluters,” allright as long as countries promise not to make an atomic bomb as well. Th e has had to come clean about his panic over Iran has emerged not only because it is impossible to be sure Iran status. He is a paid fl ak for the has only commercial intentions but precisely because it could use the same nuclear industry (oh and yes the technology for nuclear weapons. It’s time the U.S. led by example and, as a logging industry and possibly the fi rst step, at least abandoned new uranium enrichment projects on home soil. chemical industry and proponents of genetically modifi ed foods and....) Does this sound like an environmentalist to you? Of RetroActivist course not. But this didn’t stop the Washington Post headlining Licensed To Kill: How the nuclear Moore as “a Green” when running power industry destroys marine his Outlook section apology for wildlife and ocean habitat to all things nuclear in April. Th en save money, a joint publication the New York Times, perhaps of NIRS and the now defunct also beguiled by Moore’s myths, Safe Energy Communication pronounced nuclear power a good Council, was published 5 years idea in a recent editorial. Moore ago. This landmark report, takes his sound bites as well as containing new research, found his paycheck from the Nuclear that endangered sea turtles - Energy Institute, the industry among many species of marine lobbying behemoth. He rests his life - were harmed and killed by the routine operation of nuclear reactors. At reputation on being a Greenpeace the time, the report revealed that the agency responsible for monitoring and die-hard who underwent a regulating sea turtle captures at reactor intakes - National Marine Fisheries wondrous epiphany when he Service - chose to accommodate the industry’s fi nancial concerns over the suddenly discovered, among other welfare of animals by simply raising the permitted “take” numbers at plants things, that the Th ree Mile Island already capturing sea turtles. This practice continues. Recently, we have accident was “a success story.” witnessed allowed increased “takes” of endangered Kemps Ridley turtles at the Now with Moore’s loyalties out Oyster Creek reactor, for example. This disregard for impacts to non-human in the open, the media’s habitual species cannot go unfettered. Be sure to check the wildlife impacts when description of him as some sort of contesting license extensions at your local plant or proposals for new reactors. environmentalist needs to stop. tritium leaks into drinking water, has declined. Read the NIRS press THUMBS DOWN as it has near a reactor in Ilinois, release on this at www.nirs.org. and tritiated water is ingested, it Yucca Mountain Doozy can cross the placenta and aff ect Going Bananas, or was that Nuts? unborn children, a fact supported As if the Yucca Mountain project NRC Commissioners are supposed by the medical profession. But weren’t a big enough joke already, to retain an impartial view toward an unrelenting McGaffi gan then along comes the Department of nuclear power and protect the demanded to know “is NIRS Energy’s latest creation, “Yucca public’s health and safety. But as position that we give up bananas?” Mountain Johnny.” In an obvious we all know, the NRC agenda is in when he alleged that pregnant attempt to make their fl awed site reality rather diff erent. Th is was women who ate Brazil nuts and sound like a fun place to store never more apparent at a recent bananas would get a “factors of high-level radioactive waste, public meeting on emergency 100 higher” dose of radiation from the DOE has created the Yucca planning when Commissioner potassium 40 than “they’d ever get Mountain Youth Zone, complete Edward McGaffi gan launched from drinking tritiated water.” After with hard-hatted Johnny. Th e into a tirade, at fi rst directed at Gunter cited one of his sources most ironic item on the site is NIRS with whom he said the NRC - leading phycist and nuclear fuel entitled “Using Science to Solve the has to “compete on a daily basis.” cycle expert, Dr. Arjun Makhijani Problem” the one thing the DOE (Th is seemed odd since NIRS is - McGaffi gan railed: “He’s another apparently neglected to do. After also about protecting public health person who doesn’t know anything identifying two key challenges to and safety.) McGaffi gan accused about radiation.” NIRS has since the choice of site - the longlasting NIRS invited speaker Paul Gunter fi led a motion for Commissioner half-lives of isotopes in the waste of going to Illinois to “use factoids McGaffi gan to recuse himself from and the potential for water contact or made-up facts or irrelevant licensing proceeding decisions - the DOE asks: How would you facts in order to . spur fear in involving NIRS and Dr. Makhijani solve these problems? Perhaps the public. You yourself have - NIRS’ expert - in the LES uranium waiting for children to provide done that. I mean, you yourself enrichment case because of the the solution is their best hope for go and do this placenta thing.” Commissioner’s obvious bias a better plan than Yucca? Yucca Th e “placenta thing” was Gunter’s and prejudice against NIRS and Mountain Johnny is at: www. earlier observation that when Makhijani. McGaffi gan, predictably, ocrwm.doe.gov/youth/index.shtml. WHAT YOU CAN DO Make a Gift to NIRS. Whether through cash, stock, planned or in-kind giving, any gift you make to NIRS will be put to good use. NIRS provides the experts and the expertise to hundreds of groups and individuals who are not resourced to wade through the often arcane materials designed to deter activisim and opposition to nuclear power. Your support will ensure that communities everywhere are better protected because they are better informed and better supported, thanks to the hardworking NIRS staff . Make a 6930 Carroll Avenue, suite 340 gift today. See page 3 for details. Takoma Park, MD 20912 Tel: 301.270.6477 Join NIRS. NIRS is the only national nonprofi t whose sole focus is ending Web: www.nirs.org nuclear power. By joining NIRS, you are supporting the work of an energetic team at our national and regional offi ces as well as the many grassroots activists around the country for whom the NIRS information, access and The Atomic Watchdog was designed by specialists, are invaluable. Depending on your level of membership, you will Mary Schrider. It is edited by Linda Gunter, be eligible to receive copies of our in-depth publications and special reports, NIRS Director of Development and Media including the Nuclear Monitor and the Atomic Watchdog. Signing up to our Relations, with contributions by NIRS staff Alert List means you will hear from us when there are actions you can take to and others. Suggestions welcome. help promote a world free from nuclear power. See contact information at left. * NIRS in the Mary Olson News By Kitty Boniske * Mary Olson was heard on NPR’s “All NIRS staff er Mary Olson Th ings Considered” addressing the is on a roll. In recent nuclear power relapse. months she’s given presentations on nuclear * A nuclear power piece ran on issues at the United Nations and has been AlterNet quoting Paul Gunter about heard on NPR’s “All Th ings the bonanza AmerGen stands to reap - Considered” and “Living over $400 million in decommissioning on Earth. She will shortly trust funds - after paying just $10 appear in MS Magazine. million for the Oyster Creek plant. In all these venues, she has displayed her unique talent for dealing with * Pulse of the Twin Cities ran Public complex issues in a way Citizen nuclear expert Michele Boyd’s that is understandable opinion-editorial about climate to the average listener. change that references NIRS. Mary joined the NIRS staff in 1991 and began making a major contribution to our work when she led our eff ort to prevent high-level nuclear waste from * Mary was quoted in an being dumped on Indian reservations. We were able to stop 26 of the proposed 28 sites. In 1994 she initiated the Mobile Chernobyl Campaign to oppose a Environmental News Service story change in the law which would have permitted a temporary “parking lot dump” about the relicensing of the Browns at Yucca Mountain. 1996 found her working on what came to be known as Ferry Nuclear Plant. the Nix MOX Campaign, an eff ort to head off the DOE’s plans to use weapons grade plutonium in the fuel mix in civilian nuclear power reactors. Mary and * Las Vegas City Life ran an article her husband Pete live near Asheville, NC - where the NIRS southeast offi ce is about Peggy Maze Johnson’s trip based - a beautiful little mountain town she has dubbed a “Nuclear Crossroads.” She is helping grassroots groups to organize around the dangers of escalating to the C-20 conference in which she shipments of radioactive materials through the region between Savannah River mentions NIRS.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nuclear Power and Harm to Animals, Wild and Domestic
    THE CASE AGAINST NUCLEAR POWER Nuclear power and harm to animals, wild and domestic A PUBLICATION OF BEYOND NUCLEAR Nuclear power and harm to animals, wild and domestic 1 Cover image: Gray Wolf, by Gunnar Ries, Creative Commons/Flickr Acknowledgements This booklet would not have been possible without all the incredible work that has already been done on this subject by our colleagues around the world. Many of our sources are acknowledged in the endnotes, but we would like to give special thanks to two scientists in particular. Dr. Timothy Mousseau and his colleagues have worked extensively in the radioactively contaminated zones around both the Chernobyl nuclear disas- ter site in Ukraine, and the stricken Fukushima reactors in Japan. Far from finding animals “thriving” in the absence of humans, Mousseau and his colleagues discovered birds suffering sterility and cataracts, small mammals with tumors, and generally reduced life expectancies. Dr. Bruno Chareyron, and his France-based laboratory, CRIIRAD, have sampled and analyzed wild habitats in Europe, North America, Siberia and Africa with alarming results. Dr. Chareyron found high levels of radioactive contamination in lakes, rivers, aquatic plants, desert sands and rocks and in the air. His conclusions about the negative impacts to human health apply to animals as well. In 2001, two of us now at Beyond Nuclear, but then at other organizations, published an in-depth study about the impact on marine animals from the routine operation of coastal US nuclear power plants. We have quoted our report — Licensed to Kill—extensively because sadly, since then, almost nothing has changed for the better.
    [Show full text]
  • It's Time to Expand Nuclear Power
    Intelligence Squared U.S. 1 01/23/2020 January 23, 2020 Ray Padgett | [email protected] Mark Satlof | [email protected] T: 718.522.7171 It’s Time to Expand Nuclear Power Guests: For the Motion: Kirsty Gogan, Daniel Poneman Against the Motion: Arjun Makhijani, Gregory Jaczko Moderator: John Donvan AUDIENCE RESULTS Before the debate: After the debate: 49% FOR 47% FOR 21% AGAINST 42% AGAINST 30% UNDECIDED 11% UNDECIDED Start Time: (00:00:00) John Donvan: We have a key note conversation because the topic relates to science. Would you please welcome to the stage Bill Nye, the science guy? [applause] Bill Nye: John, so good to see you! John Donvan: Great to see you. [applause] So, that was the appropriate level of applause, I think. Bill Nye: Wow! Intelligence Squared U.S. 2 01/23/2020 John Donvan: There was a really interesting story that relates to you and Intelligence Squared that I want to start with. Bill Nye: Ah, yes. Yes. John Donvan: And you were -- you have been, in the past, a member of our audience. You've been out there. And there was one particular debate that you attended, and an interesting thing happened. Pick it up from there. Bill Nye: So, I was at a debate about genetically-modified organisms, GMOs. And -- John Donvan: The resolution was: Genetically modified food -- Bill Nye: Is good or bad. Or was necessary. John Donvan: No. It was -- it was stated as an imperative: "Genetically-modified food." It was a sentence. Bill Nye: Ah, yes. John Donvan: Okay.
    [Show full text]
  • Dear President Obama
    OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA FROM U.S. ORGANIZATIONS Mr. President: It’s time to move from talk to action on nuclear disarmament. April 28, 2014 Dear President Obama, During the closing session of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague on March 25, 2014, you cited a number of concrete measures to secure highly-enriched uranium and plutonium and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime that have been implemented as a result of the three Nuclear Security Summits, concluding: “So what’s been valuable about this summit is that it has not just been talk, it’s been action.” Would that you would apply the same standard to nuclear disarmament! On April 5, 2009 in Prague, you gave millions of people around the world new hope when you declared: “So today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” Bolstered by that hope, over the past three years, there has been a new round of nuclear disarmament initiatives by governments not possessing nuclear weapons, both within and outside the United Nations. Yet the United States has been notably “missing in action” at best, and dismissive or obstructive at worst. This conflict may come to a head at the 2015 Review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). We write now, on the eve of the third Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) meeting for the 2015 Review Conference of the NPT, which will take place at UN headquarters in New York April 28 – May 9, 2014, to underscore our plea that your administration shed its negative attitude and participate constructively in deliberations and negotiations regarding the creation of a multilateral process to achieve a nuclear weapons free world.
    [Show full text]
  • NEW TITLES in BIOETHICS Annual Cumulation Volume 20, 1994
    NATIONAL REFERENCE CENTER FOR BIOETHICS LITERATURE THE JOSEPH AND ROSE KENNEDY INSTITUTE OF ETHICS GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, DC 20057 NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS Annual Cumulation Volume 20, 1994 (Includes Syllabus Exchange Catalog) Lucinda Fitch Huttlinger, Editor Gregory P. Cammett, Managing Editor ISSN 0361-6347 A NOTE TO OUR READERS . Funding for the purchase of the materials cited in NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS was severely reduced in September 1994. We are grateful for your donations, as well as your recom­ mendations to your publishers to forward review copies to the Editor. In addition to being listed here, all English-language titles accepted for the collection will be considered for inclusion in the BIOETHICSLINE database, produced at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics under contract with the National Library of Medicine. Your efforts to support this publication and the dissemination of bioethics information in general are sincerely appreciated. NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS is published four times Inquiries regarding NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS per year (quarterly) by the National Reference Center should be addressed to: for Bioethics Literature, Kennedy Institute of Ethics. Gregory Cammett, Managing Editor Annual Cumulations are published in the following year (regarding subscriptions and claims) as separate publications. NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS is a listing by subject of recent additions OR to the National Reference Center's collection. (The subject classification scheme is reproduced in full with Lucinda Fitch Huttlinger, Editor each issue; it can also be found at the end of the (regarding review copies, gifts, and exchanges) cumulated edition.) With the exception of syllabi listed NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS as part of our Syllabus Exchange program, and docu­ National Reference Center for Bioethics ments in the section New Publications from the Ken­ Literature nedy Institute of Ethics, materials listed herein are not Kennedy Institute of Ethics available from the National Reference Center.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bravo Test and the Death and Life of the Global Ecosystem in the Early Anthropocene
    Volume 13 | Issue 29 | Number 1 | Article ID 4343 | Jul 20, 2015 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Bravo Test and the Death and Life of the Global Ecosystem in the Early Anthropocene Robert Jacobs Introduction contaminating fish, birds, animals and plants far from nuclear test sites. As many of these On March 1st 1954 the United States tested its radionuclides remain dangerous for hundreds first deliverable hydrogen bomb at Bikini Atoll of thousands of years, the dangers inherent in in the Marshall Islands. The weapon yielded a thermonuclear detonations would produce force three times as large as its designers had legacies still not well understood. planned or anticipated.1 The radioactive fallout cloud that resulted from the weapon would kill As radiation from Bravo the test spread around a fisherman located 100 km away, cause illness the Pacific Ocean, contaminating fish that in hundreds and perhaps thousands of people would be caught thousands of miles away, across hundreds of miles, and contaminate human conceptions of warfare and of nature entire atolls with high levels of radiation also began to mutate and change. displacing residents most of whom have never been able to return to their homes. Slowly it U.S. strategic nuclear planners quickly would become evident that, while this weapon recognized the radiological fallout as a had been tested in the Marshall Islands, its powerful tool of war, separate from the power detonation was a global event. of blast and heat that were fundamental to nuclear war fighting strategies. Over time both People around the world were shocked by the the United States and the former Soviet Union devastation wrought by the American nuclear would integrate the capacity of this weapon to attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki near the poison vast swaths of the Earth with lethal end of World War Two.
    [Show full text]
  • The Japanese Nuclear Power Option: What Price?
    Volume 6 | Issue 3 | Article ID 2697 | Mar 03, 2008 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Japanese Nuclear Power Option: What Price? Arjun Makhijani, Endo Tetsuya The Japanese Nuclear Power Option: What particular, energy-hungry China and India- but Price? also for the region as a whole. In Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere, plans for and Endo Tetsuya and Arjun Makhijani expressions of interest in nuclear energy have been expanding. In the midst of rising oil With the price of oil skyrocketing to more than prices, expectations are growing that nuclear $100 a barrel, many nations including Japan energy will fill the gap between energy demand and the United States, are looking to the and supply. nuclear power option among others. Is nuclear power a viable option in a world of expensive In the area of global warming, the Fourth and polluting fossil fuels? Japan Focus, in the Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental first of a series of articles on energy options Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that centered on renewable options and thethe global temperature will increase by 2.4 to environmental costs of energy options, presents 6.4 degrees Celsius by the end of the 21st the case for nuclear power recently made by century if fossil-fuel dependent economic Endo Tetsuya and a critique of the nuclear growth is maintained. It is now universally option by Arjun Makhijani. recognized that the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a matter of urgency, and necessitates seeking viable, reliable alternative sources of energy. In this sense, Atoms for the Sustainable Future:nuclear energy can be expected to contribute Utilization of Nuclear Energy as a Way to to global efforts to cope with the global Cope with Energy and Environmental warming problem as its carbon dioxide Challenges emissions are much smaller than those of fossil sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Could Asian Nuclear War Radioactivity Reach North America
    Institute for Energy and Environmental Research For a safer, healthier environment and the democratization of science Could Asianhttp://ieer.org Nuclear War Radioactivity Reach North America? (Earthfiles Interview with Arjun Makhijani) © 2002 by Linda Moulton Howe Reporter and Editor, Earthfiles.com Red arrow points at India and Pakistan on opposite side of the world from Canada and the United States. The Marshall Islands where the U. S. experimented in the 1950swith many atomic tests is at the far left in the Pacific Ocean. From Marshall Island and Nevada Test Site nuclear explosions, radioactive fallout riding on the prevailing westerly winds reached North Carolina and New York, distances nearly equivalent to the 10,000 to 12,000 miles India and Pakistan are from the west coast of the United States. June 4, 2002 Takoma Park, Maryland – If India and Pakistan strike each other with Hiroshima-sized bombs, how much radioactivity could reach the atmosphere and fall out around the world? That is a question I began asking a week ago and discovered that very little is known about the consequences downwind of such a catastrophe. The National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California seemed like it should know. NARAC’s public affairs office describes its “primary function is to support the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of Defense (DOD) for radiological releases.” But when I asked an page 1 / 7 Institute for Energy and Environmental Research For a safer, healthier environment and the democratization of science informationhttp://ieer.org officer there for information about the spread of radioactivity in the atmosphere from a nuclear war in Asia, the answer was, “That information is classified in the interests of national security.” One scientist who wants to talk about potential radioactive fallout and its threat to earth life is Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D., President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) in Tacoma Park, Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • Consent-Based Siting
    Consent-Based Siting From: Karen Hadden [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 12:00 AM To: Consent Based Siting <[email protected]> Subject: Comments regarding Consent‐Based Siting 1 SEED Coalition and No Nuclear Waste Aqui Comments – July 31, 2016 In Response to DOE Invitation for Public Comment regarding Consent-Based Siting Dear U.S. Department of Energy, These comments are being submitted on behalf of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, a non-profit environmental organization based in Texas, with 2500 members, and the No Nuclear Waste Aqui network, which includes individuals and organizations in Texas and New Mexico. Several of our members attended the Tempe meeting, at great expense. Everyone had to fly to the meeting since it was too far to drive. It’s 743 miles to Tempe from Andrews, Texas. Former State Rep. Lon Burnam from Ft. Worth, Humberto Acosta from Andrews, Rose Gardner from Eunice and Noel Marquez from Artesia, NM, and I joined others from New Mexico at the Tempe meeting. I was also able to attend the Minneapolis meeting and listened to several other meetings through internet. Our comments address the questions that you have asked as well as some that should have been asked. They include: 1) How can the Department ensure that the process for selecting a site is fair? 2) What models and experience should the Department use in designing the process? 3) Who should be involved in the process for selecting a site, and what is their role? 4) What information and
    [Show full text]
  • April 30, 2012 Hon. Barbara Boxer Chair, Senate Environment And
    April 30, 2012 Hon. Barbara Boxer Chair, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Hon. James Inhofe Ranking Member, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senators Boxer and Inhofe, We are writing to urge you to do everything in your power to oppose the confirmation of Kristine Svinicki to a second term as a Commissioner of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The purpose of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is to regulate the nation’s nuclear power industry in order to protect the public health and safety. Yet during her first term as an NRC Commissioner, Ms. Svinicki uniformly voted for nuclear industry interests at the expense of public health and safety. The March 2011 nuclear disaster at the U.S.-designed reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi site has brought a new level of public attention and scrutiny to the manifest dangers of nuclear power. The ability of U.S. nuclear reactors—23 of which are virtually identical to those at Fukushima Daiichi with a dozen more using the same design concept—to withstand earthquakes, loss-of-power situations and other challenges both natural and man-made is of critical importance. Yet on March 9, 2012, Ms. Svinicki, alone among the five current NRC Commissioners, voted against the implementation of all of the first three post-Fukushima safety measures recommended by NRC staff through the use of a regulatory framework that concludes that they are necessary for the adequate protection of nuclear reactors. This follows a long pattern of similar votes that gives the appearance Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Test Site: Desert Annex of TESTS SINCE the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories 1945 Q Denotes “Subcritical” Introduction Test
    Western States Legal Foundation Nevada Desert Experience Information Bulletin Summer 2005 update 1,000+ U.S. NUCLEAR The Nevada Test Site: Desert Annex of TESTS SINCE the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories 1945 q denotes “subcritical” Introduction test Aardvark 1962 Abeytas 1970 The Nevada Test Site (NTS), an immense tract of desert and mountains northwest of Las Abilene 1988 Able 1946 Able 1951 Vegas, is the test range where the United States government set off over 900 nuclear Able 1951 Able 1952 explosions during the Cold War phase of the arms race. For most Americans, the Test Site is Abo 1985 Absinthe 1967 only a symbol of a closed chapter of history, a time of great danger that now is over. Even Ace 1964 Acushi 1963 those who know that the Nevada Test Site still is used for “subcritical” testing of nuclear Adobe 1962 Adze 1968 weapons materials and components underground may think operations largely have been Agile 1967 Agouti 1962 Agrini 1984 suspended, with unused facilities retained only against the eventuality of a return to full scale Ahtanum 1963 Ajax 1966 underground nuclear testing. But the Test Site remains an important part of the nuclear Ajo 1970 Akavi 1981 weapons complex, both a remote site where dangerous activities can be conducted with little Akbar 1972 Alamo 1988 public knowledge and a weapons laboratory unto itself. High risk programs involving nuclear Aleman 1986 Algodones 1971 material, such as nuclear criticality experiments, are slated for transfer to the Test Site, and it Aligote 1981 Aliment 1969 Allegheny 1962 also is being considered as a location for a proposed factory to mass produce plutonium pits, Alma 1962 Almendro 1973 the atomic explosive “triggers”at the core of most nuclear weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Defense Institute Court Ordered DOE Documents Released
    Environmental Defense Institute News on Environmental Health and Safety Issues February - March 2010 Volume 21 Number 2 Court Ordered DOE Documents Released Show Major Reactor Vulnerabilities In 2005 Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free, Environ- other documents, including updated ore revised versions, or portions of updated ore revised versions, of the mental Defense Institute and David McCoy (Plaintiffs) documents at issue in the lawsuit or from litigation any filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with refusal by the Defendants to release such other documents the Department of Energy (DOE) for documents related to to the Plaintiffs.” the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) located at the Idaho Environmental Defense Institute (EDI) conducted an National Laboratory. DOE refused to release the extensive review of the 1400 pages released by DOE by information claiming “national security” exemption. Court Order, This EDI review is blocked from including Plaintiffs subsequently filed a lawsuit in U.S. Federal more than 210 pages of DOE censored redactions in this District Court of Wyoming. FOIA disclosure that include; The Court issued a decision. In that 2007 decision the a.) Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) – Court rejected the DOE's arguments that the Documents >104 pages; could be withheld for security reasons. The Court, b.) Emergency Management Hazardous Assessment balancing the need for open government with the possible (HAD) – >98 pages; threat of a terrorist attack at INL, stated "blocking public c.) Engineering Design Files
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear-Spent Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Preface and Acknowledgments 5
    Nuclear-Spent Science Matters, LLC Science Matters, Bethesda, Maryland Fuel and High-Level Radioactive December 2019 Waste Disposal A Review of Options Considered in the United States An independent report Deepcommissioned Inc. Isolation, by Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D. Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgments 4 Executive Summary 8 i. Early considerations 9 ii. The 1980 Environmental Impact Statement and geologic disposal 11 iii. Retrospective on the geologic disposal decision 13 iv. The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act 14 v. The Continued Storage Rule 15 vi. Conclusions 16 I. From the 1950s to the mid-1970s 18 i. The 1957 National Research Council Report 20 ii. Lyons, Kansas 26 II. The changing framework in the 1970s 33 i. The energy front 34 ii. A change in nuclear power prospects 35 iii. The Indian nuclear test 38 III. Options for spent-fuel and high-level waste disposal 41 i. Transmutation 45 ii. Disposal in space 48 iii. Ice-sheet disposal 54 iv. Sub-seabed disposal 58 v. Island disposal 61 vi. Well injection 61 vii. Rock melt 64 viii. Disposal in very deep holes 66 ix. Disposal in a mined geologic repository 69 IV. Retrospective on disposal options 78 i. Breeder reactors and reprocessing 80 ii. Reprocessing-dependent disposal approaches 83 iii. Non-reprocessing dependent disposal concepts 88 iv. Deep-vertical borehole disposal 93 v. Horizontal borehole disposal 95 V. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act 98 VI. The NRC’s Continued Storage Rule and geologic isolation 106 i. The Continued Storage Rule 107 ii. Comments on continued storage and geologic isolation 108 VII.
    [Show full text]