. N ul / NUCLEAR POWER ATTITUDES IN THE U.S.S.R.
Richard Wilson ao ~ ' Harvard Universitu go - 9 - Cambridder Massachusetts 0213 0 f
.. , , _a v () A.
During a recent visit to the Soviet Union, as a
duest of the Soviet Academu of Sciences, I made efforts
to discover the attitudes of various scientists and
others about nuclear electric Power, and in Particular,
the effect on Proliferation of nuclear weapons.
I talked in Part,icular with Acedemicians Pietr Ka-
Pitsa and Andrei Sakharov who, although not directlu
involved with the nuclear Power Prodram of the LIS S R ,
are interested as concerned citizens and had made Publ-
ic statements on the subject. In a speech to the Sovi-
et Academu of Sciences two sears ador Pietr Kapitsa
said there were "three important problems about nuclear
Power how to Prevent nuclear accidentsr what to do
about nuclear wastes, and how to Prevent Proliferation
of nuclear weapons." This was reported in the New York
Times in Audust 1977, but the Times did not report the
next sentencer 'It is vital that we solve these Prob-
lems soon because there is no other solution Ethan nu- clear Power] to the world's enerdu Problems." Napitsa re tu r ned to enerflu -rehlems in his Nobel address in De- cember 1978, and his idean_have been uidolu disseminat- 790824o494 827 130 O D m)D QvI PAGE 2 ~9'} ~ ollu_)].1_ _a ed (1).
Sakharov had discussed the importance of nuclear
Power to the strendth of the Western world in an arti- cle published durind 1978 in the Orande Counts Press and in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (2). Both Ka-
Pitsa and Sakharov reaffirmed their Principal Posi- tions.
Kapitsa believes in fusion, and he has a microwave
Plasma (3) in his laborators which he believes in the
' hottest Place on earth" (50 million decrees). He is more optimistic about nuclear fusion than most e::Perts
I know, and more optimistic than his son, Professor
Serdei P. KaPitsa. However, he told me that we must have fission until fusion comes in and several times durind our conversation, coverind an afternoon at his
Institute and en afternoon at his Dachar he asked me what the U.S. is doind about a breeder reactor, and seened not to.believe the answer "nothind." I commented that the official Position is that there is enoudh ur- anium until the end of the centuru in the U.S.A.r and beind now G5 uears old, Kapitza feels that 21 uears is a short time. He repeated, "uou must develop a b reetie r . "
I discussed in Pa rti.ciela r mu own interest of en- nurinn that evoliferation of nucleer weapons amond na- tions and terrorist droups does not occur (4). We all adreed that this should be limited and all the scien- tists I talked to conuidered tt to be a technica11u in- 827 131 PAGE 3
solubler but hopefullu contro11 abler Problem. Kapitza
' had thouuht about this the most clearlu. He pointed % out that this was a reason whu stovernmen ts must cont rol h,M , nuclear Power so that Plutonium is kept out of Private
Kapitra was willind to admit that operation bu '. hands. g [.M stovernments instead of bu private enterprise midht de-
crease the efficiencu and therebu increase the cost,
but thinks it is a small and necessars Price to Pau.
Sakharov believes that Proliferation of weapons,
and Plutonium in Particular, can be controlled bu in-
stitutional means, and he comrnented that it is imPor-
tant not to spend too much time on non-e::istent or
small Problems when the real ones of the world e:< i s t .
For c::ampl e r he Pointed out that the PLO and the Red
B ristaden have stood connections with the KGBr and it would Prabablu be easier for them to det bombs from the
KGB than to manufacture even a crude bomb themselves.
He stated his belief that if the world situation dets less stabler the KGB will Provide them.
Russia is a veru sedmented societu and mu visit
was to the Academu of Sciences and not to the Ministru of Atomic Enerdu. Most scientists I met are not inter-
ested in this issue. Hownver, all the scientists were
most interested in a factual doucription of what h. Pened at Three Mile Islandr Pennsulvaniar on March 28,
1979 and subseouent daus. I sta ve seminars on this at
the Joint Institute of Nuclear Research, Dutino and at
the Institute of Nuclear Phunic_;r Gutchinar and con- 827 02 D l[dl PAGE 4 t ms Onlu Druno Pontecorvo (still workind at Dubna) knew mans details about the Three Mile Island accident, having read them in Il Messadero in Itals while on a recent visit. I understand that Russian nuclear Power stations have an endineer on everu shift, and also have a recorder in the control room as we do in aircraft cockpits in the U.S. The scientists I talked to, in- cludind the chief of the 15 MW(t) e::P e r i men ta l reactor at Lenindrad and the 100 MW(t) reactor under construc- tion, the chief of the 10 MW (t) D0 reactor- at Moscow 2 (Institute for E::Periment and Theoretical Phusics) and the chief endineer for the new Pulsed reactor at Dubna (4 MW(t) averade, 7000 MW Pulse) all acree that a con- tainment vessel is a good idea. When these e:-:P e r i m e n- tal reactors were clarted, there were no safetu rules and no safetu committees. Now theu have five separate sueervisors safets committees in Leningrad. ("At first we had to educate them--now thou are even helpful".) The sedmentat, ion of Soviet societs means that none of mu Russian friends had ans direct responsibilitu for safetu of Power reactors and did not know the People who do. Theu aPParentlu have none of the "outside' checks--such as the Advisoru Committee on Reactor Safe- duards (ACRS), which includes even a Phusicist or two who double check the endineers and were impressed bu mu descriptions of ACRS Operation. I referred to the article bu Dr. Ale::androv ( P r e -- 827 133 D I C'i) L WwI PAGE 5 O - -} 'l O k . Q sident of the Soviet Academu of Sciences) in either Pravda or Izvestia (I'm not sure which) where he com- mented that the Three Mile Island accident couldn't happen in the U.S.S.R. because theu don't have the Profit motive to make them cut corners. Thew all agreed that this was a Political, not a scientifier statement, thoudh the9 all insist that Proliferation auestions demand dovernment ownership. We t21ked about the economics of nuclear Power over a dinner at the (apartment) home of Professor Ser- dei Karitsar son of Pietr Kapitza, where another duest was one of the leadind Soviet economists, Professor Abel Adanbedian, from Novosibirsk. Thou consider nu- clear Power to be vital for European Russia because of the cost of brinding coal from Siberia. (This seems analodous to the economics of nuclear Power in New End- land compared to the advantades of coal in Montana.) Thew Plan to have about 70,000 megawatts (electric) b9 1990. Sakharov was interested in the Price of electrici- tu in the U.S.; it is 4 koneks/kwh in Moscow andr for some reason he did not know, 6 kopeks /kwh in Sverd- lovsk. dave an averade fidure of 4c /kwh in Poston with 2.Sc/kwh oil-fired busbar cost and 1.5c/kwh nu- clear busbar cost. Sakharov in his article (2) suddested usind bomb e:: Plosions as a source of enerdu. This idea is called Project Pacer in this countru. I Pointed out that this 827 134 rm D Dm) ' cv1 PAGE 6 C ~Q'} ~ vb. _.] led to problems of control, and Poucholodical Problems of acceptance, which far dreater than those Posed bu plutonium in a reactor. Sakharov accepted this criti- cism. We had no discussion of nuclear waster and it did not seem to be on easone's mind. I did not asks and no one volunteered, information about t he supposed nuclear accident in the Urals (5). I asked all the scientists about Public reaction to nuclear Power. Since the societu is segmented, this means reaction of' scientists in other disciplines. I was told that there is sometimes concern bu ecolodists and biolodists, but this concern is lardels confined to the larde-scale effects of so much enerdu deposited in rivers and estuaries from coolindtowers, etc. Academician Lobashov (Russia's leadind nuclear Phusi- cist) told me that he used to be opposed to nuclear Powerr but is now in favor of it to reduce air Pollu- tion. He does not want to see coal burned near cities. Air Pollution is improvind in Moscowr there is a larde fossil fuel Power Plant in Moscow in Cheremushinskauar . near most of the scientific institutes. Twentu uears ado I saw it belchind black sulfurous smoke. Now it is cleant burning natural das from Kazakhstant but how land this das will last is unclearr as it is also need- ed for domestic Purposes. I saw an e:: ample of this as I saw natural das beinq connected to the small villade of Nicholina Garar where the NaPitzasr the Minister or 827 135 ' D Dj su es EU - _ PAGE 7 D)_ [f ,u a ss & - 1 Atomic Enersw and other important eccele have their da- chas. Sakharov in Particular was concerned about keepind down air Pollution. He Pointed out that coal Probablu Produces mans more cancers than nuclear Powerr and that the Harrisburn accident killed no one and caused less than one cancer. He was not conversant with the deta- iled numbers, but accepted mu estimate of 3000 cancers a uear from air Pollution in the U.S.A., based upon a Proportional relation of effect to doser and (Perhaes) ten times as mans bronchial and other erablems. Sakharov asked about the doses received at Three Mile Island, and when I said it was 3000 man rems, said that he had heard that but was surprised that so small a dose caused so much Public concern. He compared it at once to doses from bomb tests--which of course he knows well. Each bomb test nives a much hisher dose, and the dose commitment to the end of the centurs from Past bomb tests is about 40 millirem Per Person (10 man rems over the world). Seeakind denerallu Sakharov commentedr" nuclear , weapons rose moral Problems; the Problems of nuclear Power are on1s those of arithmetic', and went on to ask whu the Western Press did not educate the Public about the advantades of nuclear electric Power, in simple waus. It was clear to me that even those who have been e:: Posed to the western world find it hard to understand what the freedom of the Press means in the west; thou h27 \36 _ PAGE 8 find it hard to realire that the Press and television do not feel it to be their duts to educate People to the official dovernment Position. Sakharov then Pressed me further; whu do not more scientists educate the Public in this was, and I explained that I endeavor to do so. I described mu Problems of debatind wih Ge- orde Wald, a Professor emeritus in the Biolods depart- ment at Harvard, who in a radio debate (with me) came out with the factuallu incorrect statement that " Pluto- nium is the most toxic substance known to man" (radiunt is more to::ic) . He understood the difficultu of res- Pondind to someone who has, bu virtue of his Nobel Prize, more Prestide than muself. In conclusion, it is clear then the Soviet Union is unlikelu to be deflected from its Plans to develop nuclear Power 69 the tune of discussion we have in the west. Even those Soviets who dissent in other matters support the dovernment's Position on nuclear Power. However, I believe the Soviet People to be receptive to discussions of proliferation of weapons and how to con- trol it. , , c31 gn 0 R CR - g ,gr} ,e ., D ss ' k Acknowleddement 827 137 Mu wife, Andree, accompanied me to the U.S.S.R. PAGE Y and rarticiPated in manu of the in f o r ci 31 discunnions. She also discussed the manuscript with me. ' D 99 0 6G ! n gro QntT A 6 ul0] u b Q . 827 138 * . PAGE $0 mn ' a REFERENCES D 3 - CJ cs J D 9 i V . - Q 1. Kapitzar P.L., Speech to Academu of Sciences, U.S.S.R., 1977; Nobel address, Stockholm, - 1978. 2. Sakharov, A.D., "Nuciear Enersu and the Free- dom of the Westr' Bull. Ai c!n . Sci. 34, No. 6, P. 12, June, 1978; Oranse Counts Report- er, 30 Jan. 1978. 3. Kapitzar P.L., Sov. Phus JETP, 30, No . . 6, P. 199r 1970. 4. Wilson, R., "How to H:;ve Nuclear r*ower without Nuclear Weapons," Bull. Atom. Sci., 33, No. 9, P. 39, 1977; and " Reducing the Prolifera- tion of Nuclear Weapons bu Advancins Nuclear Power," in the Polieu Gap, Chicado Council on Foreidn Affairs, 1979. 5. Trabalkar J.R., L.D. Euman, F.L. Parkerr Struumen, . E.T.C. L.I. Auerbacht Nuclear Saf- etur 20, 206, 1979. 827 139