Bad week for terrorists, but threat level raised to Orange again
Tom Ridge announced that threat indicators are "perhaps greater now than at any point" since Sept. 11, 2001, with strikes possible during the holidays. Nuclear plants are mentioned as a concern, but no more so than several other potential targets. Washington, New York, and west coast are mentioned, as are overseas interests. The al Qaeda kind of folks would love to outdo the Sept 11, 2001 attacks, and concern is expressed for bio or chem weapons. Airplanes as weapons continues to be of interest to terrorists. Parting thought: (quote from chairman of the Joint Chiefs this morning) "There is no doubt, from all the intelligence we pick up from al-Qaeda, that they want to do away with our way of life." [Gen. Richard Myers, "Fox News Sunday"]
[Ref: Jennifer C. Kerr (AP writer), "Nation's threat level goes to orange Ð high risk of terrorist attack", Associated Press, December 21, 2003]
What delightful news about Libya. Here's a series of nuclear-related items from press coverage:
December 20, 2003
Libya's nuclear weapons program more advanced than we thought
Libya's action halted an active nuclear weapons program that U.S. intelligence agencies had never said publicly that Libya possessed.
[Ref: William Douglas and Jonathan S. Landay (Knight Ridder Washington Bureau), "Libya to end weapons programs: Gadhafi agrees to inspections, admits programs to build chemical, nuclear, biological weapons", Edmonton Journal (Alberta), December 20, 2003, p. A4]
Never before had Libya acknowledged a nuclear program. A team of U.N. and British inspectors visited Libya in October and then again in early December, searching more than 10 sites connected to the nuclear program, according to a senior Bush administration official. CIA officials also visited key sites. Libya's nuclear weapons program was "much further advanced" than U.S. and British intelligence agencies had thought, the official said. The inspectors saw completed centrifuges, as well as "thousands of centrifuge parts.""Libya admitted to nuclear fuel-cycle projects that were intended to support a nuclear weapons program, weapons development, including uranium enrichment," the official said. In addition, those inspectors visited medical and agricultural facilities that could be used in the development of biological weapons. But it was Libya's nuclear program that most alarmed officials. "We were not surprised on the chemical side," the official said. "On the nuclear side ... my understanding is that they did have a much further advanced program, including centrifuges." Another senior administration official said Libya's weapons programs are robust "in every area." "It's enormous," the official said. "We have grave concerns about the program."
[Ref: CNN.com (dateline Washington DC), "Bush official: Libya's nuclear program a surprise", December 19, 2003]
Questions about Libya and the Axis of Evil
Libya approached British and U.S. officials in mid-March, about the same time the war in Iraq began. But there was nothing to indicate the nuclear or chemical weapons materials came from Iraq. The same senior Bush administration official who was the source for the above statements refused to say whether the government of Libya's leader, Col. Moammar Gadhafi, had supplied material to Saddam Hussein's former regime, and the official refused to name other nations that Libya has worked with on weapons development, except that Libya admitted cooperating with North Korea on the development of "extended-range Scud missiles."
[Ref: CNN.com (dateline Washington DC), "Bush official: Libya's nuclear program a surprise", December 19, 2003]
Stopping rogue WMD - success story in Libya is hoped to serve as lesson
Libya, a pariah state for decades, said yesterday it would abandon its weapons of mass destruction programs and allow unconditional inspections, drawing praise from Washington and London for its move toward rejoining the international community. Libya had chosen "of its free will" to "completely eliminate the internationally banned weapons of mass destruction," the foreign ministry said. Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi said the "wise decision" showed his country was committed to "building a world free of weapons of mass destruction and all sorts of terrorism."
U.S. President George W. Bush immediately praised Libya for taking "essential steps" on the weapons programs and said: "Its good faith will be returned." "Today's announcement shows that we can fight this menace through more than purely military means; that we can defeat it peacefully, if countries are prepared, in good faith, to work with the international community to dismantle such weapons," British Prime Minister Tony Blair said. He also said the U.S. and Britain would work to ensure Libya lives up to its agreements. And, "perhaps", as Reuters put it, "with an eye on North Korea and Iran", Bush added: "I hope that other leaders will find an example in Libya's announcement today."
[Ref: Salah Sarrar (Reuters News Agency, dateline Tripoli), "Libya to scrap banned weapons; Move wins praise from Bush, Blair; Had 'advanced' nuclear program", The Toronto Star, December 20, 2003, p. A12]
Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, after secret negotiations with the United States and Britain, agreed to halt his nation's drive to develop nuclear and chemical weapons and the long-range missiles to deliver them, President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair said Friday. Blair, speaking from Durham, Britain, and Bush, addressing reporters in the White House briefing room, described a process of nine months of secret talks and onsite inspections, initiated by the long reviled Libyan leader shortly after he agreed to a settlement in the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland. In the decision announced Friday by all sides, Libya agreed to disclose all its weapons of mass destruction and related programs and to open the country to international weapons inspectors to oversee their elimination "Colonel Gadhafi's commitment, once it is fulfilled, will make our country more safe and the world more peaceful," said Bush.
[Ref: Jennifer Loven (AP writer, dateline Washington), "Libya will give up weapons program, allow inspectors, Bush and Blair say", Associated Press, December 19, 2003]
Britain said Libya had been close to making a nuclear bomb
[Ref: Salah Sarrar (Reuters News Agency, dateline Tripoli), "Libya to scrap banned weapons; Move wins praise from Bush, Blair; Had 'advanced' nuclear program", The Toronto Star, December 20, 2003, p. A12]
Libya - status of US sanctions and prospects for future change
The U.S. considers Libya to be a rogue state. It currently bans most economic activity and bars its citizens from traveling to Libya without special government permission.
[Ref: Kyodo News Service, "Libya agrees to give up WMDs, allow inspections", Japan Economic Newswire, December 19, 2003]
Last month, the US government renewed this passport restriction for a year but said it would review the matter every three months.
Bush offered the prospect of U.S. assistance for Libya in the future, saying: "As Libya becomes a more peaceful nation it can become a source of stability in Africa and the Middle East. Should Libya pursue internal reform, America will be ready to help its people to build a more free and prosperous country."
Libya escaped broader U.N.-imposed international sanctions this year after accepting responsibility for the bombing of a Pan Am airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 and paying out $2.7 billion (U.S.) to the families of victims. Washington left its sanctions in place, citing suspicions Tripoli was seeking biological and chemical weapons.
[Ref: Salah Sarrar (Reuters News Agency, dateline Tripoli), "Libya to scrap banned weapons; Move wins praise from Bush, Blair; Had 'advanced' nuclear program", The Toronto Star, December 20, 2003, p. A12]
Bush expects Libya to fully join war on terror, too
Bush said the United States and Britain, wary of Libyan promises, would watch closely to make sure Gadhafi keeps his word. And he said Libya's promises on weapons aren't enough; it must "fully engage in the war against terror" as well. If Libya "takes these essential steps and demonstrates its seriousness," Bush held out the promise of helping Libya build "a more free and prosperous country."
[Ref: Jennifer Loven (AP writer, dateline Washington), "Libya will give up weapons program, allow inspectors, Bush and Blair say", Associated Press, December 19, 2003]
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Libya sent numerous signals that it wanted to avoid a confrontation with the United States. In talks with Assistant Secretary of State William Burns in London several months after the attacks, a top aide to Gadhafi offered to hand over information on a Libyan Islamic group with ties to the al-Qaida network.
[Ref: William Douglas and Jonathan S. Landay (Knight Ridder Newspapers, Washington Bureau), "Libya to halt nuke efforts", Deseret News (Salt Lake City, Utah), December 20, 2003, p A1
Libya's decision - invasion of Iraq "might have been a factor"
Richard Murphy, a former U.S. assistant secretary of state now at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the U.S. invasion of Iraq "might have been a factor" in Libya's decision to give up its weapons of mass destruction. 'I hope that other leaders will find an example in Libya's announcement.'
[Ref: Salah Sarrar (Reuters News Agency, dateline Tripoli), "Libya to scrap banned weapons; Move wins praise from Bush, Blair; Had 'advanced' nuclear program", The Toronto Star, December 20, 2003, p. A12]
The White House suggested that Libya's dramatic decision was influenced by the war in Iraq that toppled Saddam Hussein, as well as U.S. efforts to rein in weapons of mass destruction capabilities in North Korean and Iran.
[Ref: Jennifer Loven (AP writer, dateline Washington), "Libya will give up weapons program, allow inspectors, Bush and Blair say", Associated Press, December 19, 2003]
Libya, by the way, knew one of its weapons material shipments had been intercepted
Another significant factor, U.S. officials said, was that Libya had become aware that U.S. and British intelligence had developed direct, verifiable knowledge of weapons materials possessed by Gaddafi. The U.S. hand in the negotiations was bolstered, officials said, by a previously undisclosed interdiction under the Proliferation Security Initiative, a U.S.-led agreement with allies allowing searches of planes and ships suspected of carrying banned weapons or missile technologies. Officials provided no further details.
[Ref: Peter Slevin and Glenn Frankel (Washington Post staff writers), "Libya Vows to Give Up Banned Weapons; Bush and Blair Hail Results of Nine Months of Secret Talks", The Washington Post, December 20, 2003, p. A1]
Gaddafi wanted to stay away from Axis of Evil
... yesterday the Libyan leader demonstrated that he did not want to be included in America's "axis of evil". He has long been suspected of developing weapons of mass destruction, particularly chemical weapons. But last night's revelation that his regime had been developing a full "nuclear cycle" - giving him the capability of making weapons-grade fissile material - will have come as a surprise to many experts.
[Ref: Anton La Guardia, "Analysis: Gaddafi yielded to 'good cop, bad cop' trick", The Daily Telegraph (London), December 20, 2003, p. 12]
UK-USA version of 'good cop, bad cop' prompts Libya to good move
TONY Blair... last night underlined his conviction that Libya's decision to come clean on its weapons of mass destruction was a vindication of his policy of "engagement" with rogue regimes in the Middle East. But in Washington, the Bush administration will see the latest move as evidence that military action in Iraq is beginning to transform the whole of the Middle East. The reality is probably somewhere in between, in which America and Europe have played a "good cop, bad cop" game with radical regimes in the Middle East.
[Ref: Anton La Guardia, "Analysis: Gaddafi yielded to 'good cop, bad cop' trick", The Daily Telegraph (London), December 20, 2003, p. 12]
Libya prompted by Iraq example (stick) and UK diplomatic carrot
"For anyone who is a hawk on weapons of mass destruction, this is a welcome event," said Ashton Carter, assistant secretary of defense during the Clinton administration and an adviser to Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean. "We should hope that our resolve over Iraq's WMD had something to do with convincing the Libyan leadership to take this course." White House officials said they felt certain that the brewing military confrontation with Iraq influenced Gaddafi's decision to reach out. Their British counterparts acknowledged the value of strong action, but also maintained that Britain's decision to reestablish diplomatic relations with Libya in 1999 was a factor.
[Ref: Peter Slevin and Glenn Frankel (Washington Post staff writers), "Libya Vows to Give Up Banned Weapons; Bush and Blair Hail Results of Nine Months of Secret Talks", The Washington Post, December 20, 2003, p. A1]
Libya's uranium enrichment system was not operational
U.S. and British experts inspected components of a centrifuge program to enrich the uranium, though the system was not operational, a senior Bush administration official said, briefing reporters at the White House on condition of anonymity.
[Ref: Jennifer Loven (AP writer, dateline Washington), "Libya will give up weapons program, allow inspectors, Bush and Blair say", Associated Press, December 19, 2003]
Here's the relevant excerpt from the briefing transcript, Q means the unnamed reporter's question, and A means the unnamed senior administration official's answer:
Q: What's your understanding of how close they were to having a nuclear bomb?
A: I can't get into that, specifically.
Q: Were you surprised at the extent of what they had? Is there anything they had that surprised you? Did you know they had this much quantity and technology and equipment?
A: I think we were not surprised on the chemical side. On the nuclear side, I think that -- and you should probably talk to an intelligence expert on this -- but my understanding is that they did have a much further advanced program, including centrifuges.
Q: Can I follow on that point? First of all, how many centrifuges did they show you or did they declare? What kind of centrifuges were they? Were they a familiar design to you? And do you have any indication that they had actually produced HEU and did they say in what quantities?
A: I'd prefer not to get into the specifics. We did see both full up centrifuges, as well as thousands of centrifuge parts.
Q: Did you see cascades, were they individual centrifuges or were they in cascades?
A: We did not see a cascade up and running.
Q: Did you see a facility for a cascade?
A: I'm not sure. The answer is no, we did not see an enrichment facility; we saw the components that would make for an enrichment facility.
Q: Did they declare that they actually had produced any significant quantities of HEU?
A: They did not declare that.
[Ref: News Briefing by senior Bush Administration official after President Bush's announcement about Libya, December 19, 2003]
Those who think WMD brings power or prestige are wrong, sez Bush
Bush used the announcement to try to nudge unnamed "regimes that seek or possess weapons of mass destruction" into similar cooperation. "Those weapons do not bring influence or prestige; they bring isolation and otherwise unwelcome consequences," he said. "Leaders who abandon the pursuit of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, will find an open path to better relations with the United States and other free nations."
[Ref: Jennifer Loven (AP writer, dateline Washington), "Libya will give up weapons program, allow inspectors, Bush and Blair say", Associated Press, December 19, 2003]
Libya shows Arabs that there is a peaceful way to deal with USA
Friday's developments could help improve Washington's image in the Muslim world, where anger is high over U.S. support for Israel, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and American pressure on Iran and Syria.
"It shows, even beyond the Muslim world, there's two ways to approach the United States," the senior State Department official said.
[Ref: William Douglas and Jonathan S. Landay (Knight Ridder Newspapers, Washington Bureau), "Libya to halt nuke efforts", Deseret News (Salt Lake City, Utah), December 20, 2003, p A1
Libya to pursue civilian reactor program; Russia plans to help
Russia recently informed the United States that it intends to cooperate with Libya to promote civilian nuclear programmes. The Americans notified Israel in recent days, and now Washington and Jerusalem are trying to stop the Russians and to prevent the advancement of Libyan leader Mu'ammar al-Qadhafi's nuclear plans. Defence sources fear that once they are built, it will be easy to transform the Libyan reactors to produce nuclear weapons. This development places Libya alongside Iran with regard to the attempts to develop nuclear arms. Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee, takes a grave view: "I learnt about the possible Russian-Libyan nuclear cooperation only recently. Of course, such a development will worry us very much. Libya is apparently been managing quite well on its own and has made progress in its nuclear programme. The Libyan threat to Israel's well-being might prove no less grave than the Iranian one."
Jerusalem's fears about Libya apply also to Tripoli's development of long-range missiles. These missiles are supplied by North Korea, and the Al-Qadhafi regime has been extending their range. In its contacts with European countries, Israel has been warning that these missiles don't only endanger us but also such European capitals as London, which might find themselves within their range.
[Ref: Qave Shafran (IDF radio political correspondent), IDF Radio (Israel Defence Forces), Tel Aviv, "Israeli officials said worried about Russia-Libya nuclear cooperation", December 16, 2003 0500 gmt (translated from the Hebrew by BBC Monitoring)]
Libya was recruiting foreign n-weapon experts
The United States and Britain learned that Libya was trying to put together a team of foreign experts to build the nuclear weapon, he said. The official declined to say from which countries these experts were being recruited, but his comment indicated that while Libya was enriching uranium, it may not have fully built a warhead or developed plans to do so and would have to rely on foreign experts.
[Ref: William Douglas and Jonathan S. Landay (Knight Ridder Washington Bureau), "Libya to end weapons programs: Gadhafi agrees to inspections, admits programs to build chemical, nuclear, biological weapons", Edmonton Journal (Alberta), December 20, 2003, p. A4]
Bolton was the only one that pegged Libya's nuclear program
Libya was not formally part of President George Bush's original "axis of evil" in his State of the Nation speech in January 2002 when he named Iraq, Iran and North Korea as enemies who posed a mortal threat to the world because of their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and their support for terrorism. Many in the Bush administration, notably John Bolton, under-secretary of state responsible for weapons proliferation, had openly enlarged the definition to include Syria, Libya and Cuba. During a visit to London earlier this year, Mr Bolton had expressed alarm about Libya's nuclear program. But British officials had studiously played down its significance, either out of naivety or because they were trying to negotiate a behind-the-scenes deal with Tripoli to abandon its weapons.
[Ref: Anton La Guardia, "Analysis: Gaddafi yielded to 'good cop, bad cop' trick", The Daily Telegraph (London), December 20, 2003, p. 12]
Don't forget Libyan oil
Libya is also a major potential source of oil outside the unstable Persian Gulf region. Its oil fields were developed by U.S. firms, led by Occidental Petroleum, and Libya has been preserving tracts for American companies' return since President Reagan ordered them out in 1986.
[Ref: William Douglas and Jonathan S. Landay (Knight Ridder Newspapers, Washington Bureau), "Libya to halt nuke efforts", Deseret News (Salt Lake City, Utah), December 20, 2003, p A1
Libya acted of it's own volition; did not bow to pressure
Col Gaddafi ... insisted that the nation had acted of "its own free will" rather than bowing to pressure from the United States and Britain... Gaddafi said in a statement that his country wanted to take the lead "in building a new world free of weapons of mass destruction and all kinds of terrorism, with the aim of preserving international peace and security and progress for humanity".
[Ref: Andrew Woodcock and Jon Smith (political staff, PA News), "Libya to dismantle WMD programmes", Press Association (UK), December 20, 2003]
Libya urges Israel to do the same
Col Gaddafi ... said the move was to serve as an example to other countries in the Middle East "without exception", an apparent reference to Israel, which has long been believed to possess nuclear weapons.
[Ref: Andrew Woodcock and Jon Smith (political staff, PA News), "Libya to dismantle WMD programmes", Press Association (UK), December 20, 2003]
WMD move - promotes democracy and green goals
Col Gaddafi ... said that ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction would also help promote "popular democracy" and to "meet ecological challenges so that the colour green will prevail all over the globe".
[Ref: Andrew Woodcock and Jon Smith (political staff, PA News), "Libya to dismantle WMD programmes", Press Association (UK), December 20, 2003]
Libya developed WMD in self-defense
The foreign ministry statement maintained that Libya had long advocated such a move to make the Middle East and Africa "a region free of weapons of mass destruction". However, the statement added that Libya's call "did not receive serious response ... so Libya endeavoured to develop its defence capabilities".
[Ref: Andrew Woodcock and Jon Smith (political staff, PA News), "Libya to dismantle WMD programmes", Press Association (UK), December 20, 2003]
Two atoms bump into each other. One says: "I think I lost an electron!" The other asks: "Are you sure?" To which the first replies: "I'm positive."
[Thanx to William Reville, associate professor of biochemistry and director of microscopy at University College, Cork, in his "Under the microscope" column today in The Irish Times]
ITER site selection meeting - Dec 20
Representatives of Japan, Russia, the European Union and Canada will come to Washington DC this week, where the US Department of Energywill host the December 20 final meeting to choose the site of the experimental nuclear fusion reactor project knwn as ITER -- International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. The project was suggested by the Soviet Union in 1985, and the US was one of the early supporters of the idea. As time went on, the US Congress became disappointed with how expensive the project plans had become. In 1998, the USA withdrew from the project. The remaining member nations were able to cut the project plan's costs by about half, and President Bush last January indicated that the US would rejoin the project talks. The US apparently will pony up some $500-million for the project. No US location is in the running for being selected as the reactor site. The Bush Administration is also offering to make contributions to ITER in the form of construction work and seeks involvement in the project's administration, as well as scientific research and technological development.
[Source: Jerome Bernard, "US rejoins ITER after five year absence", Agence France Presse, December 16, 2003]
December 14, 2003
Iraq's new national holiday
Saddam hiding in a tiny "spider hole" -- sic semper tyrannis!
Mission to Mars - radiation might be show-stopper
A new $34-million NASA research lab at Brookhaven is charged with finding out what the effects on astronauts are likely to be from the radiation exposure received during a mission to Mars. NASA has some experience with astronauts being exposed, of course, but the type and magnitude of the exposure in this case is quite different than our previous endeavors.
The astronauts who went to the Moon on Apollo 14 accumulated about 1,140 millirem in their nine-day mission. The astronauts on Skylab who spent 87 days in low Earth orbit received a dose of about 17,800 millirem. Brookhaven estimates that a round trip to Mars would result in a dose of 130,000 millirem over two and a half years. Most of the dose would be from subatomic particles like protons. On Earth, we don't get much dose from these, because they mostly get deflected by the planet's magnetic field and absorbed by the atmosphere. So even though we can compare dose (ergs per gram, multiplied by an estimated "quality factor") to the more common forms of radiation we're exposed to throughout our lives (alpha, beta, and gamma), there's much we don't know about the biological effects of the dose that might be received on a Mars mission. On a trip to Mars and back, probably every cell in the body would be hit by an ionized particle or a proton, researchers say, and they have very little idea what that would do. "If every neuron in your brain gets hit, do you come back being a blithering idiot, or not?" asked Dr. Derek I. Lowenstein, the chairman of Brookhaven's collider accelerator department. A trip to Mars means "trying to live in an environment that human beings were not built to live in," Dr. Lowenstein said. "Space is not 'Star Trek', but the public certainly doesn't understand that." One theory holds that cells busy repairing damage from protons will not be able to cope with damage from heavy ions; another says that proton irradiation will prime the cell's repair system to be ready for particle damage. "It's a reasonable thing to ask, what are these first protons going to do to the later response to iron," said Dr. Betsy Sutherland (a staff biologist), noting that the theory had not been tested.
NASA's chief scientist, John M. Grunsfeld, a spacewalking veteran himself, expects that the current 5-year research plan will need to be extended before we know enough to give a scientific basis for a "go-no go" decision.
[Source: Matthew L. Wald (New York Times), "Mars Mission's Invisible Enemy: Radiation", The New York Times, December 9, 2003]
Iraqi Colonel sez "I was the one who gave 45-minute figure to Brits"
It was the head of an Iraqi air defence unit who was the source of the 45-minute claim in the Iraq WMD dossier issued by the Government in September 2002, says the fellow himself. A Lieutenant-Colonel al-Dabbagh (first name withheld at his request) told The Sunday Telegraph that "I am the one responsible for providing this. Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour." The weapons he was talking about were battlefield weapons to be fired from rocket-propelled grenades, and were not for use in missiles. "They arrived in boxes marked 'Made in Iraq' and looked like something you fired with a rocket-propelled grenade... They were either chemical or biological weapons; I don't know which, because only the Fedayeen and the Special Republican Guard were allowed to use them. All I know is we were told that when we used these weapons we had to wear gas masks." Col al-Dabbagh said he had no idea what became of the weapons he was describing. He believed the weapons would not be found until Saddam was caught or killed, as people would then feel freer to speak about them.
[Source: Andrew Clennell, "Iraqi colonel: I am WMD claim source", The Independent (U.K.), December 7, 2003]
Energy bill - dead in Senate for 2003
The Republicans were counting on minority leader to come up with two more votes for cloture, but Sen. Daschle attended a book-signing in the suburbs Thursday night instead of being on the floor while the ethanol provision (the "Daschle amendment", its called) was debated. Many Republicans were opposed to the ethanol subsidy, but were willing to vote for it as part of a compromise. You can bet that Daschle will have to give up more, much more, to get a similar ethanol provision in the next session, if the current bill doesn't survive. How well this will sit with Daschle's farm constituency in South Dakota is a big question.
As late as yesterday, the Republicans thought there was still a chance to pass the bill by stripping a product liability provision designed to protect manufacturers of MTBE -- a gasoline additive that helps clean air efforts but has been found to contaminate water supplies. On Monday, the White House stepped up pressure on House Republican leaders to take the MTBE provisions out of the bill, but still met resistance from DeLay and Barton. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., was willing to press the issue and force a settlement if necessary, but he wanted first to see a vote-count in the Senate showing the bill would pass. A GOP official close to the negotiations said several Senate Democrats had expressed a willingness to change their votes and support the bill if the MTBE liability provision were taken out, but backed away from the idea after Republicans won a key vote Monday on a Medicare prescription drug bill. "It was like a door slamming shut," said this official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. With Bush assured of a victory over Medicare, there was a belief that Democrats didn't want to hand the president another triumph on a marquee piece of legislation, the official said.
[Sources: Jeff Gannon (Talon News), "Daschle's Dems Derail Energy, Ethanol Until Next Year", Talon News, November 25, 2003; and H. Josef Hebert (AP writer), "Senate Gives Up on Energy Bill for 2003", Christian Broadcasting Network, November 25, 2003]
Ginna sold to Constellation, contingent on license extension
Constellation Energy Group, owner of Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mle Point, this morning announced that it had struck a deal with Rochester Gas & Electric to purchase the 495-MW Ginna plant. Ginna has been a top performer in recent years by every yardstick -- 95% capacity factor over past three years, the top INPO rating for past 6 years, and a score of 100% on the WANO index for 11 consecutive quarters. Purchase price: $401-million, plus an extra $21.6-million for fuel on hand. Ginna is physically located very close to the two units at Nine Mile Point. Both sites can be expected to benefit from common ownership.
[Source: Constellation Energy press release, "Constellation Energy Group to Acquire Ginna Nuclear Power Plant", November 25, 6:30 am ET]
Davis-Besse - criminal referral from NRC to US attorney?
A federal grand jury is investigating FirstEnergy for possible criminal violations involving Davis-Besse. The grand jury was called after the NRC's Office of Investigations filed a report with the Cleveland U.S. attorney's office. The NRC's investigative branch sends reports to the U.S. Department of Justice when it believes it has found evidence of wrong-doing. Shari Weir of Ohio Citizen Action, a Cleveland-based organization that is trying to keep Davis-Besse from restarting, said the NRC should not even consider allowing a restart until the grand jury finishes its work. But the grand jury investigation should not affect the restart process any more than the Office of Investigations report did, said NRC spokesman Jan Strasma. The NRC officials charged with overseeing the restart process at Davis-Besse have been fully briefed on the report's findings, he said.
[Source: Jim Mackinnon (Beacon Journal business writer), "FirstEnergy says Davis-Besse ready", Akron Beacon Journal, November 25, 2003]
The IAEA board of governors handling of Iran is a huge story. Here are some weekend press coverage highlights:
* US accuses Iran in 'lies' and attacks UN chief
Pravda (Russia)
The United States assailed Iran yesterday for what it claimed were "lies" about its nuclear program and voiced
unprecedented criticism of the U.N. atomic agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, suggesting he glossed over 18 years of
deception that included enriching uranium and processing plutonium. Addressing delegates, U.S. envoy Kenneth Brill
criticized Iran for "violations and lies" by enriching uranium, processing small amounts of plutonium, and other
activities that the Bush administration says point to a weapons agenda. "Iran systematically and deliberately deceived
the IAEA and the international community about these issues for year after year after year," Brill said. The purpose,
he said, was "the pursuit of nuclear weapons." A diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity said only a few
countries -- Canada, Australia and Japan -- supported the U.S. position. ElBaradei dismissed the criticism. "We
reflect facts, as radar does, without partiality," ElBaradei said. "We do not jump to conclusions or make leaps of
faith. We have not said that we have come to the conclusion that the Iranian program is exclusively for peaceful
purposes, because we still have work to do." He suggested that in at least one instance -- the war in Iraq -- the
IAEA's credibility was "enhanced," and America's diminished, because there is still no sign of the nuclear-weapons
program the Bush administration accused Saddam Hussein of having.
A new proposed response to evidence of Iran's clandestine nuclear program is being drafted by EU representatives this weekend. Diplomats say the new draft would satisfy Washington by including a provision allowing the board of governors to take strong measures should Iran in the future defy its obligations under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
* Nuclear Agency Divided Over Iran Resolution
Douglas Frantz, Los Angeles Times (registration required)
A U.S. official said the Bush administration was insisting on tough wording from IAEA Board because a weak message
could encourage other countries that might be interested in developing nuclear weapons. "The rubber meets the road on
the NPT right now," said the official, who spoke on condition that he not be identified. "People are making
calculations on this, people in laboratories." Backroom discussions were expected over the weekend in Vienna and the
capitals of the countries involved to come up with language acceptable to both sides by Wednesday. One idea gaining
support is to establish a timetable for Iran's acceptance of tougher inspections and dismantling its elements of its
nuclear program, several diplomats in Vienna said. Diplomats said the United States might try to block a resolution
that it considered too weak. "No resolution is better than a bad resolution," said a senior Western diplomat. "We can
take the issue up in March after the next report following the aggressive inspection process" now underway.
* Diplomats deadlocked on Iran nuclear program; US seeks ruling of noncompliance
Brian Whitmore, Boston Globe
Many at the IAEA board meeting view the current talks as a precedent-setting case of how the international
community will handle future cases of nuclear proliferation. "Iran's breaches of its obligations have been brazen and
systematic," Kenneth Brill, the US ambassador to the UN mission in Vienna, said in a speech to delegates. "How the
IAEA deals with the discovery of so much of Iran's hitherto entirely secret nuclear program will be a critical
watershed for the global nuclear nonproliferation regime."
A Western diplomat said Iran was "trying to leverage everything they can" to influence the outcome of the talks. Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's representative to the IAEA, raised the stakes yesterday by suggesting that Tehran would not sign on to a tough new inspections regime if they were declared in noncompliance or reported to the Security Council. After yesterday's meeting, Brill said "This is not surprising, but it isn't acceptable."
* Iran breaches of nuke safeguards 'brazen': US
Agence France Presse/IranMania News
A British statement delivered to the IAEA board said the Iran resolution must, as well as warning possible
proliferators, "set a framework for future co-operation between Iran and the Agency." It said London's "immediate
priority was to build on Iran's new approach and to ensure it was sustained."
Kenneth Brill, the US Ambassador to the IAEA, told the board however that Iran has not proved it can be trusted. He said "Iran's breaches of its obligations have been brazen and systematic and far from merely 'technical' ones." Brill said Iran's claim to have turned a new page in cooperation since October can not be taken at face value since "so much of what it has said in the past year about its nuclear program has turned out to be false."
* Iran vows: 'No' to decisions suppressing its nuclear energy ...
Arabic News
Iran sees the current IAEA Board of Governors meeting as an important event. Here's an excerpt from former
president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's sermon at Friday prayers in Tehran: "The next few hours are the hours of trial.
We are waiting to see how much the US can impose its own inhuman and colonial views on the board through threat,
coercion and bribing."
* EU-Iran relations in the last two years
Nawab Khan, IRNA/Payvand's Iran News
Iran is seen by EU as a potentially constant and stable supply of energy. Iran is endowed with 10 percent of the
world's oil reserves and 16 percent of natural gas reserves. In a recent report, the Commission said that the EU's
dependence on external supplies of oil will increase from the current 75 percent to exceed 85 percent by 2020. The
report said that 80 percent of EU's imports of petroleum products come from the Persian Gulf region where the
concentration of oil production is likely to increase significantly over the next few decades. In the wake of the
American invasion of Iraq, which Iran views as a stark violation of the UN charter, both the EU and Iran are
worried about US intentions in the region. Therefore, EU-Iran cooperation and engagement are
expected to grow and widen in the post-Iraq war developments. An EU statement, read out at the IAEA board meeting in
Vienna on 21 November said the EU is willing to consider the new undertaking by the Islamic Republic of Iran as a
significant step toward the restoration of confidence in Iran nuclear intention and toward the reassurance of the
International Community.
* IAEA Seeks Agreement on Iran nuclear Resolution
Melanie Sully, Voice of America
Western diplomats say that not all European countries are happy with the way they say Britain, France and Germany
presume to set foreign policy for the 15-nation European Union. The United States says Iran only admitted to a
sophisticated uranium enrichment program, after the program was discovered. The U.S. ambassador to the IAEA, Kenneth
Brill, accused Iran of deliberate deceit. He said Iran's production of plutonium had only one purpose - to build
nuclear weapons.
* Divided Over Iran's Nuclear Program, Agency Delays Action
Mark Landler, New York Times (registration required)
The IAEA board did conclude one bit of business, authorizing Dr. ElBaradei to sign an agreement with Iran that
would allow the agency to conduct surprise inspections. Iran must still sign the agreement and ratify it.
* Sparking diplomatic flap, U.S. envoy criticizes U.N. agency report as too soft on Iran
AP/Norwalk Hour (CT)
Diplomats described both the dispute between Brill and ElBaradei and the rift within the board as unprecedented in
more than two decades of meetings by the 35-nation board.
* Iran says IAEA nuclear talks going its way
Agence France Presse/Channel News Asia (Singapore)
IAEA meeting adjourned until Wednesday. Iran says a lot will happen this weekend, and thinks things are moving
favorably for them. "From now until Monday there will be a lot of developments. It is not predictable, but what we can
definitely say is that things are moving in favour of Iran," said Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's representative to the IAEA.
* Envoy rips UN on nuke report
AP/Washington Times (DC)
Iran submitted a letter to the IAEA board agreeing to open its nuclear programs to pervasive spot inspections
instead of waiting until seeing the text of the resolution. But diplomats who asked for anonymity said Iran continued
to insist it had the right to withdraw its promise to accept the inspections if the resolution made reference to
Security Council involvement or contained other language it found unacceptable. Such a move, however, would almost
guarantee a strong resolution that might meet even U.S. wishes to have Iran declared in violation of safeguard
agreements Ñ triggering possible Security Council involvement.
* US, IAEA at loggerheads over Iran
Hi Pakistan
The deep difference at the IAEA board meeting was over whether to condemn Iran's past nuclear transgressions or
focus on what major European nations say seems to be its new-found openness. A diplomat who asked for anonymity said
only a few countries Canada, Australia and Japan supported the US position. "There is evidence against Iran, but many
fear using the stick instead of the carrot will play into the hands of the hard-liners" in Tehran looking for nuclear
confrontation, he said. Many countries, led by Britain, France and Germany, think that taking the issue to the
Security Council could cause a backlash, prompting Tehran to cut off cooperation with the IAEA.
* Reuters World News Highlights 1600 GMT Nov 22
Reuters/Forbes
The USA has dropped its demand that IAEA declare Iran in violation of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
* US Lags on Approving Protocol Demanded of Iran
Carol Giacomo, Reuters/Aljazeerah.info
The USA accused the IAEA of damaging its credibility by concluding there was as yet no evidence that Iran has a
nuclear weapons program. But IAEA Director General Mohamed El-Baradei rejected the charge by saying that his agency
had after all been right in the past when it had said there was no evidence in Iraq of a nuclear weapons program.
* US drops hard line on Iran nukes
Louis Charbonneau, Reuters
U.S. Ambassador to the IAEA, Kenneth Brill, told the board on Friday that the phrase "no evidence" [to suggest
Tehran had a secret weapons program] was "highly unfortunate" in the light of revelations about Iran's cover-up and
secret experiments with plutonium reprocessing and uranium enrichment. He said the IAEA report should have used the
words "no proof" instead. Brill said the IAEA's wording had provoked "expressions of disbelief that the institution
charged with... scrutinising nuclear proliferation risks was dismissing important facts."
* Elbaradei on a tight rope
IRIB (Iran)
IAEA director general Elbaradei called "unfair" the US stance against Iran. He dismissed the claims that there had
been evidences Iran pursued a nuclear program for military purposes.
* Mother, may I?
J. Gordon Prather, WorldNetDaily
The question before the IAEA Board of Governors is: "Did any Iranian breach of their Safeguards Agreement
obligations constitute a 'diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive
devices'?" IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has told the board he can find no evidence that any of them were.
So, Undersecretary of State John Bolton can judge ElBaradei's report "simply too impossible to believe" and Israeli
intelligence can claim that Iran's nuclear program poses "a threat to the existence of Israel." But, the evidence so
far is that Ð in asserting its "inalienable rights" Ð Iran has neglected to say, "Mother, may I?"
* US, UN Trade Barbs on Iran
Vanessa Gera, AP/Washington Post
Before the discussion moved to the board members' capitals, a draft discussed in Vienna and quoted to the
Associated Press by a senior diplomat would have given the board the right to immediately call an emergency session
should any evidence surface that Iran was guilty of "significant failures." Mr. ElBaradei has said he wanted a
strongly worded report that nonetheless stops short of asking for Security Council involvement.
Determining whether Iran tried to build nuclear weapons "will take some time and much verification effort," Mr. ElBaradei told the board.
On Thursday, diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity told the AP that the agency identified Russia, China and Pakistan as likely sources for equipment that could be used by Iran for nuclear-weapons development. They gave no other details.
* IAEA delays decision on Iran nukes
Elise Labott, CNN
Last week, the IAEA released a 30-page report that detailed how Iran finally admitted to producing small amounts
of low-enriched uranium and plutonium. But at the same time, the IAEA said there was "no evidence" that those
previously undeclared materials were "related to a nuclear weapons program."
* Agency considers Iran nuclear program
AP/Citizen Online (GA)
The IAEA board of governors' meeting was adjourned Thursday after only two hours at Iran's request, a senior
diplomat said. It was to resume Friday.
* US Backs Off Stand Over Iran's nuclear Program
Voice of America
Diplomats say the United States is now pushing Britain, France and Germany to toughen up their proposal, while
accepting it will not declare Iran in non-compliance with the treaty.
* The outlook is bad for Iraq, says Hans Blix
Reuters/Taipei Times (Taiwan)
Hans Blix says the Americans are wrong to assume that Iran used a civilian energy program to develop a nuclear
bomb -- another point of tension with several European countries.
* United States softens position on Iran, but complains about atomic agency's report
George Jahn, AP/San Francisco Chronicle
On Thursday, State Department spokesperson Adam Ereli had said the United States expects the board "to meet its
obligations under the IAEA statute to find that Iran has been in noncompliance with its safeguards agreement and to
report that noncompliance to the UN Security Council."
* US left in delicate position over Iran nuke plans
Agence France Presse/IranMania News
The US Department of State Friday backed off demands to take Iran's nuclear program before the UN Security
Council. Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli refused to repeat a statement he made on Thursday that
Washington intended to take the matter before the Security Council. Ereli went too far in his statement during a State
Department press briefing Thursday, a senior State Department official said privately. The spokesman "might have been
a little too forward leaning," the official said. "I'm not sure frankly, that referring it to the security council is
something that we are insisting on in our negotiations."
* US diplomat says panel is too soft on Iran
George Jahn, AP/Seattle Times
In Washington, the State Department sought to play down any rift. "There's no intention to impugn the credibility
of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the fine work that Director ElBaradei has done in putting together what
is an important report on Iran's nuclear program," spokesman Adam Ereli said.
Chief Iranian delegate Ali Akbar Salehi suggested the United States was isolated on the board. "We think that the American delegation Ñ or the U.S. as a whole Ñ is sort of a hostage to its own accusations," Salehi said.
* US lags on approving protocol demanded of Iran
Reuters/Deepika (India)
The USA has not ratified our own Additional Protocol agreement with IAEA. We signed the agreement in 1998.
President Bush submitted it to the Senate for ratification in 2002. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee wanted to
see the implementing legslation before acting on the agreement, and the Bush administration's proposed implementing
legislation was submitted to Senate yesterday.
* Firebomb thrown at British embassy in Tehran
Agence France Presse/Channel News Asia (Singapore)
"At around 3:30 this afternoon (1200 GMT), somebody drove by and threw a small firebomb at the Churchill Gate.
There was fire damage on both sides of the gate but nobody was injured," a British diplomat said. The firebomb
appeared to have been lobbed from a passing car. The embassy was raked by gunfire on September 3. The building was
also shot at on September 9 and 14. No one was injured in any of the incidents. Also, athough Iran condemned
Thursday's bomb attacks on British interests in Istanbul, it accused Britain and the United States of creating "a
context" for such attacks by going to war in Iraq in March. "This situation has been created by certain countries who
came into the region and created a crisis and today this crisis has been transported to other countries," said Foreign
Minister Kamal Kharazi.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had previously kept his distance from Washington's view of Iran as part of an "axis of evil", has also been taking a harder line recently towards the Islamic republic.
* Pakistan denies aiding Iran's N - programme .
Hi Pakistan
"It is inconceivable - strategically and technologically" for Pakistan to provide any kind of help to Tehran for
its nuclear programme, said Munir Akram, Pakistan's ambassador to the United Nations. Mr Akram said that Iran's
nuclear programme was spread over 20 years, involving laser enrichment besides being plutonium- based which was
technologically "far superior procedures than the uranium enrichment programme that Pakistan has." He asserted that
the capability for uranium enrichment could only be acquired by Iran from a technologically superior country and not
Pakistan. On Thursday, a news report alleged that the IAEA had identified Russia, China and Pakistan among the
probable suppliers of equipment that Iran used to conduct its suspected nuclear weapons programmes. The report was not
attributed to any IAEA official but was leaked by one of the Vienna-based diplomats.
* Why destabilise Saudi Arabia?
Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Hi Pakistan
Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria have been targeted by hawks in Washington for preemptive interventions, such as was
used in Iraq. Pakistan wil be similarly targeted. US goals are to occupy the Middle East, bring in a puppet regime in
Iran, and destroy Pakistan's nuclear programme -- all for the purposes of supporting Israel and controlling oil.
* Rummy's Nuclear Weapons Could Trigger World War III
Gordon Thomas, American Free Press (Capitol Hill, D.C.)
Mini nukes got a boost by a top-secret Defense Science Board report titled Future Strategic Strike Force. The
report was produced by a group of scientists employed at Los Alamos and by Pentagon strategists. They have concluded
that in the war against terrorism, it is "essential to revamp our nuclear arsenal. We envisage a completely new
arsenal of small-scale missiles whose explosive impact would be easier to control and which could be targeted against
terror groups and small aggressive states." Though North Korea and Iran are not named, Pentagon sources say that the
"mini-nukes would be ideal for targeting them." Examples of the low-yield design ideas are an enhanced mini-neutron
bomb and a "bunker buster", capable of destroying terrorist cells deep underground. The weapons could be tested as
early as next year. A copy of the report has already been sent to Israel -Ñ and its defense chiefs have expressed "a
strong interest" in ordering the mini-nukes.
Linear, no-threshold hypothesis of radiation risk is as faulty as flat earth concept
Blaine Howard [73-year-old retired health physicist] ... continues to be disappointed at the abject lack of public understanding regarding the danger of things minimally nuclear. He could only shake his head at newspaper report that the influential Alliance for Unity has registered its official opposition to the transport of nuclear waste into Utah. Names like Huntsman, Eccles, Ballard and Niederauer are behind the A-for-U, which lends a huge amount of credibility to whatever the group is for or against Ñ even if, as Blaine suggests, in this case it doesn't know what it's talking about.
To cue up the broken record Blaine has been playing for years, it is his opinion, as well as that of any other credentialed health physicists he associates with, that there is no undue public risk in the transport and storing of low levels of radiation Ñ here or anywhere else. Of the low-level uranium mill tailings in Ohio that stirred up the latest outcry against nuclear waste coming to the Utah desert, Mr. Howard says, "If my children went out and played in it, I wouldn't be concerned that they would be harmed by the radiation." And yes, he loves his kids.
At the crux of his reasoning is a scientific belief that the linear non-threshold hypothesis is incorrect. And what is the linear non-threshold hypothesis? In layman's terms, it is the theory that if a lot of radiation is harmful, then lesser amounts are proportionately harmful. Blaine says that theory is flawed. In fact, he says, there comes a point when radiation turns the corner and actually becomes beneficial. As the latest example of that, he points to 1,500 apartments constructed in Taiwan in the early 1980s with steel bars that unknowingly exceeded legal radiation levels. More than 10,000 people lived amid this supposed danger for more than 15 years, and the result, instead of a radiation nightmare, is a rate of cancer 96.5 percent lower for the residents of the apartments than for the Taiwanese population at large. "It appears that the Taiwan Atomic Energy Council, by failing to 'protect' these people from the harmful effects of radiation, allowed them to receive the beneficial effects of radiation," says Blaine.
Blaine Howard has no agenda other than the truth. He's been retired for almost seven years now. He worked for the state for 18 years and finished his career working for Envirocare for six years. That's the same Envirocare, by the way, that until yesterday was trying to get permission to bring in the uranium tailings from Ohio. But Blaine has no ties to the company. In fact, he remains a bit miffed that Envirocare hurried him into retirement before he was ready. "I have no affiliation with Envirocare and I don't feel I was treated especially well by them," he says, "but I don't like to see them mistreated, either." As for the dumping of nuclear waste in Utah, he has no stake in whether that does or does not happen. Couldn't care less.
What he does care about is the perpetuation of a public perception that is simply not true. "I grew up as a poor farm boy (in Chester, Idaho)," says Blaine. "And then I had all these opportunities to learn and I believe, since this knowledge was given to me, I have an obligation to give it to the public so they won't have this terrible fear of something that's not dangerous and can in fact be beneficial."
He means no offense. He just wants to be on the record that the earth is not flat, so to speak. Just because something is nuclear doesn't mean it can hurt you.
[Source: Lee Benson, "Hypothesis on radiation is a waste", Deseret Morning News (Salt Lake City), November 19, 2003]
Energy bill clears conference committee
The full House is expected to vote on the bill today, and Senate before week's end. The production tax credit for up to 6,000 MW of new nuclear plants is a big enough incentive (up to $7.5-billion, theoretically) to prompt a few utilities to consider building a new plant. After these plants are built, if the construction costs are in line with expectations, the prospects for more are pretty good. It's going to be fun watching the many so-called environmentalists kick and scream about a crummy 1.8 cents/kWh production tax credit at the same time as they're urging cutting CO2 emissions at any cost.
Quote of the day: "Scare tactics and propaganda aside, nuclear power has proven to be extremely safe in the U.S. In the past 40 years, exactly zero Americans have been killed due to nuclear power. The Chernobyl disaster was caused by faulty Soviet engineering, and simply would not happen in America. Additionally, American nuclear power plants continue to make great efficiency gains. During the past 10 years, nuclear plant production costs have fallen 40 percent, from 2.8 cents per kWh in 1991 to 1.68 cents in 2001. Yet environmentalists seek moratoriums on the construction of new plants." -- Darren Rumack, "The True Costs Of Environmental Policy", Cornell Daily Sun
South Texas Project's cover photo on "Roadmap To Excellence" presentation to NRC, November 5, 2003 (courtesy of STP Nuclear Operating Company).
Nuclear provisions in "Chairmen's Mark" energy bill
* Advanced reactor tax credit - The bill encourages construction of new nuclear power plants through a production tax credit of 1.8 cents per kWh. The credit applies to the first 6,000 MW of new nuclear plant capacity put into service before 2021. The maximum credit for an individual plant is $125-million/year. The credit lasts for the first 8 years of a plant's operating life. Details of this production tax credit are found in Title 13, Section 1310, which can be found starting at page 58 of the tax3.pdf file available here.
* Advanced Reactor Hydrogen Cogeneration Project - The bill authorizes about $1-billion for R&D and construction of a nuclear plant to produce hydrogean. Details of this provision are found in Title 6, Subtitle C, which can be found starting at page 40 of the nuclear_matters3.pdf file available here.
* Price-Anderson extension - The bill extends and otherwise modifies the Price-Anderson Act, which would otherwise expire at the end of this year, through 2023. Details of the Price-Anderson provisions are found in Title 6, Subtitle A, which can be found starting at page 1 of the nuclear_matters3.pdf file available here.
* Decommissioning funds - The bill includes some decommissioning fund provisions that look pretty esoteric to the non-accountants at nuclear.com. Many appear to address how to handle transfer of such a fund when the plant is sold. There's also a provision that precludes over-funding of a decommissioning fund - the fund must not exceed the present value of the expected decommissioning costs. Details of the decommissioning fund provisions are found in Title 13, Sections 1328-1329, which can be found starting at page 139 of the tax3.pdf file available here.
* Tariffs on imported vessel heads and steam generators - The bill extends present tariff treatment through 2008. Details of the tariff provisions are found in Title 13, Section 1365, which can be found starting at page 215 of the tax3.pdf file available here.
* N-plant site feasibility study - The bill tasks DOE with studying and reporting on whether nuclear plants could be built at current DOE sites. Details of this provision are found in Title 6, Section 629, which can be found starting at page 13 of the nuclear_matters3.pdf file available here.
* Other provisions in Title 6 include such matters as security of plants and material transfers, licensing of new uranium enrichment facilities, ensuring adequate supply of medical isotopes, creating a national low-enriched uranium stockpile, government sales of low-enriched uranium, and higher education program to ensure regulatory manpower in needed nuclear disciplines.
The rest of the bill is available as a series of pdf files at http://energy.senate.gov/legislation/energybill2003/energybill2003.cfm. The language approved by conference committee will be printed in Congressional Record, presumably early next week.
Energy Bill agreement by House-Senate conferees
Details expected today. Democrats will get two days to review the language of the 1700-page bill agreed-upon by the Republican conferees before the vote.
Feature of the day - ADAMS aid
Your humble nuclear.com editor has been using NRC's online services since long before 'cousin Al' Gore invented the internet. The current NRC public document system is quite an advance over the Bibliographic Retrieval System that was used for many years. But there's still many advances yet to come, and nuclear.com is pleased to offer one little help that regular ADAMS users may find helpful. NRC updates their ADAMS system at around midnight after every business day. We download the list of new items each day, and post a stable html version right here. Having such a list in a separate window in your web browser is an advantage if you spend much time going through the day's items. ADAMS clears your query from its cache pretty often, and you have to do the whole search from scratch and then find your place again. And that's if you're lucky. Often, the ADAMS system gets so busy that multiple-hit search results never get displayed. But with the nuclear.com window open, you can browse the list, copy the ACN (that's the Accession Number - a unique document ID that lately begins with ML) you want to see next, and paste it into a simple ADAMS search box. Since you're never relying on the same search twice, you'll never be inconvenienced by ADAMS cache-clearing. That's the theory anyway. It works pretty well for nuclear.com, and it's a pleasure to share it with you. The daily ADAMS file can be found by clicking the date of the most recent update on the main nuclear.com page. If you have any wishes or suggestions on how this can be more useful to you, please don't hesitate to use the email link on any page. To enter the web-based ADAMS system, click here.
IAEA board doesn't want to alienate the lying Mullahs of Iran
Iran's sudden openness about its nuclear program seems to have hurt U.S. efforts to have Tehran declared in violation of an international nuclear arms control treaty, diplomats and experts said Tuesday.
The Bush administration wants Iran declared in violation of the treaty at the Nov. 20 meeting of the IAEA's board of governors - a move leading to U.N. Security Council involvement and possible sanctions. But Iran's diplomatic maneuvering before the meeting appears to be shifting the 35-nation board away from a harsh response.
Within recent weeks, Iran has swung from belligerent denial of wrongdoing to acknowledging past "mistakes" in not reporting honestly to the agency. While still maintaining it only wants to generate nuclear power, it has delivered what it says is complete information about past suspect activities. Last month, Iran announced it would suspend uranium enrichment and throw open its nuclear programs to unfettered agency inspections - moves that Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's chief delegate to the IAEA, said left the United States "isolated." On Monday, Tehran delivered on those promises. Hasan Rowhani, the powerful head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said uranium enrichment was suspended and a letter committing his country to extensive inspections was deposited with the IAEA.
The announcement, which came hours before the release of ElBaradei's report [an IAEA report which leaves no question that Iran covered up past nuclear programs - including enriching uranium and processing small amounts of plutonium - that Washington says prove Tehran's intent to manufacture weapons], was made in Moscow, a key IAEA board member and Tehran's potential partner in an $800 million deal to help build Iran's first nuclear power plant at Bushehr on the shore of the Persian Gulf.
A senior diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said most board members want to encourage Iran to continue cooperating with the agency instead of driving it into a corner.
Diplomats said the board might ask the Security Council to closely track Iran's commitment to cooperating with the IAEA. Also, ElBaradei probably will be given several months to investigate Iran's past activities and report back to the board.
David Albright, a former Iraq weapons inspector who runs the Institute for Science and International Security, said from Washington that Iran "understood that if they took these steps they would generate goodwill."
"There is now the danger that if it is slapped in the face, it may say it's not worth cooperating and actually build those nuclear weapons everyone fears they may be working on."
[Source: George Jahn (AP writer-Vienna, Austria), "Iran's nuclear disclosures undermine U.S. effort to get Security Council involved", The Associated Press, November 11, 2003]
IAEA report blasts Iran, but leaves an'out'
IAEA's report to its Board of Governors has been leaked to public. It is unambiguous in its conclusions that Iran has violated the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and that Iran sought to deceive the world about the violations. It does not, however, conclude that intent of Iran's actions was to build a bomb. nuclear.com notes that this is a case of diplomats being diplomatic. One need not be a mind reader to accurately see what Iran's intent has been. Click on the date link above to see articles related to the IAEA report. There will probably be much news about this today. The USA observes Veterans Day today. Our hearts here at nuclear.com are thankful for the liberty we have, and unabashedly grateful to those who have defended against folks who would trample them. Thanks, veterans. Big time.
Fusion energy - helium-3 from the moon is a commercial prospect
My colleagues at the Fusion Technology Institute of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Interlune-Intermars Initiative, Inc. believe that ... a commercially viable project exists in lunar helium-3 used as a fuel for fusion electric power plants on Earth. ...
Helium has two stable isotopes, helium 4, familiar to all who have received helium-filled balloons, and the even lighter helium 3. Lunar helium-3, arriving at the Moon as part of the solar wind, is imbedded as a trace, non-radioactive isotope in the lunar soils. It represents one potential energy source to meet this century's rapidly escalating demand. There is a resource base of helium-3 about of 10,000 metric tonnes just in upper three meters of the titanium-rich soils of Mare Tranquillitatis. This was the landing region for Neil Armstrong and Apollo 11 in 1969. The energy equivalent value of Helium-3 delivered to operating fusion power plants on Earth would be about $4 billion per tonne relative to today's coal.
... These numbers illustrate the magnitude of the business opportunity for helium-3 fusion power to compete for the creation of new electrical capacity and the replacement of old during the 21st Century.
Past technical activities on Earth and in deep space provide a strong base for initiating this enterprise. Also, over the last decade, there has been historic progress in the development of inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC) fusion at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Progress there includes the production of over a milliwatt of steady-state power from the fusion of helium- 3 and deuterium. Steady progress in IEC research as well as basic physics argues strongly that the IEC approach to fusion power has significantly more commercial viability than other technologies pursued by the fusion community. It will have inherently lower capital costs, higher energy conversion efficiency, a range of power from a few hundred megawatts upward, and little or no associated radioactivity or radioactive waste. It should be noted, however, that IEC research has received no significant support as an alternative to Tokamak-based fusion from the Department of Energy in spite of that Department's large fusion technology budgets. The Office of Science and Technology Policy under several Administrations also has ignored this approach.
[Source: Harrison H. Schmitt (Chairman, InterLune-InterMars Initiative, Inc.), "Lunar Exploration" Senate Hearings, Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space November 6, 2003]
North Korea problems - China is the big winner
North Korea's nuclear gambit, whether resolved peacefully or militarily, or even left to fester, "could transform Northeast Asia and perhaps even the balance of power in East Asia", says Pacific Forum CSIS' Brad Glosserman in an op ed in today's South China Morning Post. The impacts of festering and war he identifies are pretty straightforward, but the impacts of successful, peaceful negotiations have big upside and downside. The downside involves quickening the rising influence of New China in the region, with commensurate decrease of US influence. "While both countries want to see a peaceful conclusion to the crisis," Glosserman says, "there are increasing doubts whether their interests converge over the long term. In the words of one State Department official, the two countries have common aversions - a desire to avoid war and avoid a nuclearised Korean peninsula - but that is not the same as common interests. The Chinese government would like to extend its influence over the Korean peninsula: facilitating a settlement to this crisis would win it friends in both Korean capitals. The US needs to be concerned that South Koreans do not start looking to China for leadership in security matters. It may sound far-fetched, but rising anti-Americanism in the South, growing trade and economic links between South Korea and China, and China's desire to be the regional power could transform relations on the Korean peninsula, and those effects would spread throughout Northeast Asia.
"Critics charge that the Bush administration is not thinking about the long -term effects of its 'partnership' with China. In their more candid moments, some officials concede the criticism is on target. Yet even 'engagers' admit there is no predicting China's future and that hopes for its democratic and peaceful evolution are just that - hopes. China and the US may yet find themselves in a competition for power and influence in Northeast Asia."
[Source: Brad Glosserman (director of research, Pacific Forum CSIS), "US-China: the next alliance?", South China Morning Post, October 30, 2003, p. 17]
Deregulation puts billions in play - and you can position yourself to earn a handsome share. Can you imagine getting paid every time somebody pays their phone, gas and electric bill? How about every time five somebodies pay their bills? How about a thousand special somebodies? It's happening now in the phone industry, and energy may be next. See TooCheapToMeter page for more info. Your humble nuclear.com editor hopes you'll take advantage of this absolutely free opportunity which has tremendous earning potential.
Reversing 20-year trend, fuel failures up in last two years
In comparison to where we were 20 years ago, the performance of fuel is greatly improved. The number of light-water-reactor fuel failures has steadily declined during this time. I believe a strong contributor to this improved performance is the increased market competition between the current fuel vendors here in the United States: Framatome-ANP, Westinghouse, and Global Nuclear Fuel/General Electric. Increased competition has forced these companies to review their manufacturing processes and focus on process improvements in the area of new technologies to identify issues such as, chipped fuel pellets and flawed tubes before they are put in service. In addition, vendors are focusing on performance improvements in fuel and cladding design, and other areas to support higher fuel burnups, longer operating cycles, and power uprates.
Yet, despite these successes, the number of fuel failures in the past two years has noticeably increased. Fuel issues are back on the radar screen of many plant operators and calls for improved reliability are common. Thus, the fuel vendors are left with balancing their resources to remain competitive, but still perform the needed research to safely advance their designs.
From where I sit, it appears that industry may be overly focused on the economic issues and may be pushing the fuel too hard. I get concerned when I hear industry folks question whether fuel manufacturers have budgeted sufficient research dollars toward meeting the demand of the new, more aggressive operating environment. From my perspective, increased burnup, longer operating cycles and power uprates are key drivers for the fuel performance desired by our licensees. The fuel environment is going to be more challenging but, as a safety regulator, we need to be assured that the plants can continue to operate safely under these new conditions. To continue to insist on rock bottom fuel prices at the expense of debilitating and costly fuel failures is penny-wise and pound foolish. The industry must leverage its overall experience and utilize initiatives such as the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Robust Fuel Program to effectively deal with fuel reliability.
For our part, the NRC developed a research program to confirm the current fuel burnup limit of 62 gigawatt days per metric ton and to develop a strategy for assessing future requests for burnup extensions beyond the current NRC limit to ensure the adequate protection of public health and safety at our operating reactors. Utilizing a variety of U. S. and international facilities, the NRC research effort is appropriately focused on demonstrating that recent increases in energy output for new cladding alloys can meet our regulatory expectations for postulated accidents. Nonetheless, given the recent spike in fuel failures, I think that both the NRC and industry need to consider additional research to determine how we can get a better handle on new designs and materials that can reverse the recent increase in fuel failures.
[Source: Jeffrey S. Merrifield (NRC Commissioner), "Practical Not Perfect", keynote speech at Nuclear Safety Research Conference Washington, D.C., October 21, 2003 (ACN ML032940500)]
[Note: These comments were the basis for front page story in Oct 27 issue of trade newsletter Platts NuclearFuel, titled "Industry may be too focused on fuel economics, Merrifield says".]
Signal contamination of flow measurements used as basis for power uprates
On September 26, 2003, NRC staff met with Westinghouse representatives to discuss their root cause analysis related to the Byron Unit 1 assumed overpower condition regarding crossflow ultrasonic flowmeter (UFM) signal contamination. A portion of the meeting was closed when proprietary information was presented. Special tests indicated frequency contamination that affected the operation of the UFM. The signal contamination was traced to acoustic resonant frequencies in the piping. However, the source of the resonant frequencies is still unknown. Possible sources included feedwater and pumps or other nearby equipment. Westinghouse is still evaluating UFM performance at other plants and plans to respond to the staff questions by the end of October.
The staff advised Westinghouse: (1) to verify the integrity of the information contained in previously-approved topical reports for generic applications of the crossflow UFM; (2) to establish and publish guidelines instructing users how to operate their system; and (3) that future UFM applications for Appendix K power uprates will receive greater scrutiny with respect to signal contamination and assurance that signal contamination is not present. Byron has indicated that they will gather information using UFMs, but will not use the correction factor until the root cause analysis is complete.
[Source: "NRC Meeting with Westinghouse and Exelon on Flowmeter Power Measurements", NRC Office of EDO, Weekly Information Report, October 3, 2003 ENCLOSURE A]
Iraq CBN WMD - Kay team has uncovered 95% of a smoking gun, sez Rep. Sweeney
Mr. SWEENEY (p. H9551)
... David Kay recently issued a statement that his team has indeed found substantial evidence that Iraq had many programs hidden from view to produce nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and had active illegal programs to deliver them using ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles. I believe this is 95 percent of a smoking gun.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
Terror and WMD relegates one John Adams' notion obsolete, that "America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy", sez Rep. Feeney
Mr. FEENEY (p. H9567)
... I remember in Washington's first farewell address, he warned all of us about entering into "entangling alliances" oversees. The second President of the United States, John Adams, said "America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy." But on September 11, all of us recognized that this is a much smaller world, because monsters found America and tried to destroy us, and they are going to do it again. The next attack could be from a vial of nerve gas, a nuclear weapon, a chemical or other biological weapon that may be built in the hills of Afghanistan or the deserts of Iraq. We understand that. We recognize that, and we fully support the prosecution of the war.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
Laugh of the day*: Rep. McDermott proposes adding asterisks to 2003 State of Union speech in the permanent Congressional Record
Mr. McDERMOTT, "Question of Privileges of the House",
Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p H9509
Mr. Speaker, this is a resolution correcting the Record of Tuesday, January 28, 2003.
Resolved, That an asterisk be placed in the permanent Record of Tuesday, January 28, 2003, noting that the following statements contained in the State of the Union Address by the President of the United States are inaccurate:
One, "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Two, "Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
Three, "From intelligence sources, we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspections sites, and monitoring the inspectors themselves."
Four, "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda.".
* nuclear.com is sympathetic to expanding this idea. How about putting asterisk next to Rep. McDermott's votes against impeachment, and those stonewalling fellow travelers of his in the Senate too. After all, it seems quite unusual that the fellow who was deemed unfit to practice law in the State of Arkansas was considered fit enough to keep finger on the nuclear button.
Russian n-security scares from recent years
Human factor is the weakest link in the system of national nuclear security. The position of servicemen [in Russia] has deteriorated because of the socioeconomic situation in the country. Certain crimes committed by conscripts (rank soldiers and sergeants alike) may lead to grave consequences indeed. Several such grave crimes were committed at nuclear objects in 1998: a soldier shot all sentries at Mayak combine, a conscript committed suicide in the torpedo room of a nuclear submarine, hostages were taken at Novaya Zemlya nuclear testing ground. Nuclear weapons storage depots have not been attacked yet, but terrorists did try to reconnoiter two such objects in 2001. Fortunately, these attempts were thwarted.
[Source: Vladimir Belous (director, Center of International and Strategic Surveys), "Fortuitous nuclear war not ruled out", Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie, No 36, October 10 - 16, 2003, pp. 1+4 Translated by A. Ignatkin, What The Papers Say, October 15, 2003]
Iran - more secret facilities outed by opposition, on eve of ElBaradai trip
The opposition group that blew the public whistle on Iran's enrichment and heavy water activities announced more info today at a press conference in Vienna, Austria. Firouz Mahvi, spokesperson for The National Council of Resistance in Iran, said informers inside Iran confirmed the existence of a "new secret nuclear site" about 10 miles east of Isfahan. The 580-square-mile site allegedly houses clandestine research and uranium enrichment facilities where, among other activities, centrifuges were tested. The group also claims that Iran has not declared nuclear sites near Karaj, west of Tehran. Mahvi said the new information proves "Tehran is continuing its nuclear weapons program full force... The only way to prevent the world from having to deal with the nightmare of a nuclear equipped fundamentalist regime is for the U.N. Security Council to dismiss the regime's ploys and impose binding and comprehensive sanctions against this medieval regime," he said.
The AP reports that IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei will fly to Iran's capital Wednesday to appeal for more cooperation. IAEA officials said in recent weeks that ElBaradei had not planned to visit Tehran ahead of the Oct. 31 deadline, but the agency spoke Monday of "important questions that are still outstanding" about Iran's nuclear activities. "Time is indeed running out," ElBaradei was quoted as saying on the agency Web site.
[Ref: George Jahn (AP writer), "Iranian opposition says Tehran has secret sites for nuclear weapons program", The Associated Press, October 14, 2003]
Interim report from Kay's team in Iraq
* Iraq-Korea missile dealings - sounds like they were indeed acting as an axis
* Iraq - 1999 marked WMD turning point for impatient Saddam
* Iraq - African nation (other than Niger) did offer uranium
* Iraq - Saddam was committed to obtaining nuclear weapons
* Iraq - if no more scuds, why continue to produce its fuel?
* Iraq - "remarkable record of what was concealed from UN inspectors and not declared"
* Iraq - HY-2 missile range was increased to 180 km, and efforts to increase to 1,000 km
* Iraq - scientists who talk with Kay's group get shot; this tends to hinder the search
* Iraq - fear of Saddam is still a factor inhibiting WMD investigation
* Iraq missile program assisted by companies & govts, including EU
* Iraq - weapons-lab work embedded in intelligence organization
* Iraq - 5-7 years away from n-weapon
* Iraq - the two mobile labs showed no evidence of actually producing CBW
* Iraq - Saddam may have been deceived by his weapons scientists
* Iraq - Kay's team could take another 6-9 months
* Iraq was systematically deceiving and evading WMD inspections
* Iraq - secret biological weapons research discovered
* Iraq - unmanned aerial vehicles and US route mapping software
* Iraq - Saddam destroyed many records
* Iraq - Bush rejected "imminence" test as too risky, and has been proved correct
* Iraq - Bush was right about WMD threat, even if no stockpiles are found
"Don't get depressed at what you read in the press... Try not to panic when you switch on the news ..."
Ray Davies' advice comes to mind while reading articles from around the globe today about North Korea announcing that they've completed reprocessing the 8,000 fuel rods from Yongbyon. None of the articles see fit to mention that North Korea's UN ambassador made the same claim back on July 9. In fact, he specified then that the reprocessing had been completed in June.
And frankly, North Korea's repetitious blustering doesn't seem much different than the froth-mouthed Democrats' fantasizing about image of "frog-march[ing] Karl Rove out of the White House in handcuffs".
[Refs: Amy Bickers (Voice of America, Tokyo correspondent) Pyongyang Admits to Reprocessing Nuclear Fuel Rods",
October 2, 2003 10:58 UTC; Martin Nesirky (Reuters), "North Korea Says Processed Nuclear Rods for Bombs", October 2, 2003 09:18 ET;
London Telegraph, "N Korea produces weapons-grade plutonium", October 2, 2003;
R.D. Davies quote from song titled "Live Life" from The Kinks' 1978 album "Misfits"]
Deregulation puts billions in play - and you can position yourself to earn a handsome share. Can you imagine getting paid every time somebody pays their phone, gas and electric bill? How about every time five somebodies pay their bills? How about a thousand special somebodies? It's happening now in the phone industry, and energy may be next. See TooCheapToMeter page for more info. Your humble nuclear.com editor hopes you'll take advantage of this absolutely free opportunity which has tremendous earning potential.
*
Nuclear expert punished for using iridium to hurt business partner
Xinhuanet reports from New China that a businessman was sentenced to death after being found guilty of attempting to murder his business partner. His choice of murder weapon was a radioactive Iridium source, which he and an accomplice (who was sentenced to 15 years in prison) installed in the victim's office ceiling. The victim, and 74 others in the hospital where the office was located, were sickened, including a pregnant nurse, before the radioactive material was discovered. The partners had been jointly managing a laser medical center in the Guangdong province hospital since 1997.
An Agence France Presse article notes that in China, death sentences with a two-year reprieve, such as in this case, are often commuted to life in prison.
Lots of hydrogen fuel, perhaps from Generation IV nuclear plants
This fall, the US Congress is expected to start funding a $1.1 billion project to build a new breed of nuclear reactor -- safer, less vulnerable to terrorism, and able to both generate electricity and crank out hydrogen, the presumptive automobile fuel of the future. An international panel of scientists, dubbed the Generation IV Forum, began the process in 2001 by evaluating hundreds of futuristic reactor concepts and whittling the list down to six. This fall, the US Dept of Energy will choose one for a demonstration plant, to be built at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.
None of the designs is a slam dunk, says the lab's nuclear energy director Ralph Bennett, but the clear favorite is the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR). As its name implies, the VHTR is designed to generate intense heat: cooled by helium, it would operate at 1,000¡C Ñ twice as hot as today's water-cooled reactors. In addition to turning turbines to make electricity, the intense heat generated by the VHTR reactor will also power an adjacent hydrogen plant, where one of two chemical processes will produce 10 tons of hydrogen an hour, Southworth says. (The demo plant will kick out a modest 2 tons.) Since extreme heat is required to snap the chemical bonds of various compounds and release hydrogen, the reactor is ideal for producing the new fuel, says Finis Southworth, the DOE's VHTR expert.
Thanks to the configuration of its uranium fuel, the VHTR would be meltdown-proof, claims nuclear engineer Andrew Kadak of MIT. In today's reactors, the uranium is stuffed into hollow rods of zirconium, a metal that catches fire if the coolant is somehow drained off, resulting in a potentially disastrous radiation release, like the one at Three Mile Island. In the VHTR, the uranium will be either in the form of "pebble beds" Ñ stacked pellets of uranium covered in graphite Ñ or "prismatic blocks" Ñ uranium encased in 3-foot-high, 2-foot-wide hexagons of graphite.
Using graphite instead of zirconium to cradle the uranium means a Three Mile Island-style accident is impossible; instead of combusting in the absence of coolant, graphite allows nuclear heat to radiate away faster than it is produced. This "passive" safety system requires no frantic scrambling by personnel to save the day, making the VHTR more difficult to sabotage.
These reactors produce nuclear waste, which may cause some folks not to support the nuclear approach. But these reactors also avoid production of carbon dioxide, which may cause some folks to support the nuclear approach. A demonstration reactor will take years to build; the DOE hopes to flip the switch in 2015, just in time for the anticipated rollout of hydrogen-fueled automobiles.
[Source: Bob Ivry, "Next-generation reactors: Nuclear power heats up (again)", Popular Science, October 2003, p. 33]
Thailand uses Argonne blessing to approve research reactor construction
Thailand's National Commission on Atomic Energy for Peace has approved construction of a 10-megawatt research reactor in Onkharak, Nakhon Nayok. The reactor will be built by US-based General Atomic. The project was proposed in 1989 by the Chatchai Choonhavan administration, and won government approval in 1992. In 1998, the Office of Atomic Energy for Peace signed a contract with General Atomic to design, construct and operate the reactor. The contract expired three years ago, and GA's demand for Bt900-million compensation has not been paid. The construction cost is estimated at Bt3.55-billion.
The Commission's decision is controversial. An environmental impact report on the project has twice been rejected by the National Environment Board, most recently in July. A safety analysis report was also rejected by the Nuclear Safety Sub-committee (NSS) in Thailand and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Thailand did, however, get a favorable opinion on the safety report from Argonne National Laboratory.
Suwit Khunkitti, deputy prime minister and chairman of the NSS, told reporters that the project was necessary since it would conduct research and development in nuclear technology for the country's benefit. The Commission's decision came a day after Suwit, Science Minister Pinij Charusombat, and the secretary-general of the Office of Atomic Energy for Peace, Kriengkorn Petchabutr, had lunch together. Kriengkorn reaches retirement age tomorrow. Pinij excluded himself from the decision of the Commission: 'Frankly, I do not have any authority to make decisions on the project. Everything is under the consideration of Deputy Prime Minister Suwit,' he said.
[Ref: Sirinart Sirisunthorn, "Nuclear reactor gets govt nod for construction", The Nation (Thailand), September 30, 2003]
It takes a genius: "the Emperor has no brains" plays better as bumper sticker than as Nobel Prize winner's thesis
It's not a pretty sight when the intelligencia deigns it prudent to dumb down its message. But that's the blight we're seeing as the globalists sense a chance that Hillary could yet become president, sooner rather than later. Today's syndicated column by Columbia economist Joseph Stiglitz is a good example. "I normally write about economics, not politics", he says. Your humble nuclear.com editor notes that his excursion displays a stunningly pedestrian blend of mean-spiritedness, lies, and ignorance. His tales are so tall and rapid-fire that "Tale-gunner Joe" is worth considering as a nickname, although it would be a shame to further besmirch the late Senator McCarthy by this association.
Let's take a look at Prof. Stiglitz' discussion of President Bush's decision on Kyoto Protocol: "For three years, America's president has pursued a unilateralist agenda, ignoring all evidence that contradicts his positions, and putting aside basic and longstanding American principles. Take global warming. Here US President George W. Bush is conspicuously absent without leave (AWOL in military jargon). Time and again, he questions the scientific evidence. (Of course, Bush's academic credentials were never very impressive.) Bush's position is more than wrong; it is an embarrassment. Indeed, when asked by Bush to look into the matter, the US National Academy of Sciences came to a resounding verdict (the only one they could honestly reach) that greenhouse gases are a menace. But America's automakers love their gas-guzzlers, and Bush's oil industry pals want no interference with their destruction of the planet's atmosphere. So no change in policy."
nuclear.com wonders if the condescending professor took the time to read the NAS panel report he so enthusiastically misrepresents here. It explicitly refers to the misleading nature of UN IPCC summaries that give the impression that the science is "settled" (a tactic that Prof. Stiglitz also employs quite, uh, liberally). It explicitly points out that the variance between surface and tropospheric temperatures is at odds with our best understanding of the processes involved. It explicitly points out that temperatures have not risen as much as the models' lowest-range predictions. It explicitly concludes that the climate observing system available today "is a composite of observations that neither provide the information nor the continuity in the data needed to support measurements of climate variables." It explicitly refers to our inability to even assign a positive or negative sign to the cloud feedback. It explicitly states that "proxy data indicate that the range of natural climate variability is in excess of several degrees C on local and regional space scales over periods as short as a decade." Prof. Stiglitz is a hack, despite his impressive resume. You heard it here first.
[Ref: Joseph Stiglitz (Columbia U prof-econ; Nobel laureate; Clinton appointee), The time has come for the world to start saying no to Bush, Taipei Times, September 30, 2003, p. 9]
Slovakia eyes constructing Mochovce-3 and -4
Slovakia's new economy minister, Pavol Rusko, plans to reopen the issue of completing construction of two more nuclear reactors - the third and the fourth reactors at the Mochovce site in southwestern Slovakia. He is pursuing a national energy policy to generate enough to meet domestic needs and provide export sales. Privatization of power plants and the grid is expected to be a part of this policy.
[Ref: Radio Slovakia, Bratislava, September 29, 2003 1000 gmt (translated from Slovak by BBC Monitoring)]
Iran won't give up on enriching its own uranium
In a Persian language interview, Hamid Reza Asefi, spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry, commented on IAEA's asking Iran to stop the uranium enrichment process. Mr. Asefi's response: "The enrichment of uranium and the peaceful use of nuclear technology are not issues over which we will compromise."
[Source: Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA), "Iran: Foreign Ministry criticizes Bush, Putin over nuclear programme", September 28, 2003 (translated from Persian by BBC Monitoring)]
Fernald takes safety break after numerous near misses
Fluor Fernald management says it wants the cleanup work to be performed safely. In a recent move to emphasize this expectation for excellent safety, every shift begins with a safety talk. More managers are being brought in to help ensure that the safety expectations are communicated to employees and contractors. And this week, work was stopped on two of the six main cleanup projects. If there is a deep-rooted safety culture problem at Fernald, these humble initiatives probably won't have much effect. And if top management is willing to trade even one worker's life for the multi-million bonus for completing cleanup by 2006 instead of 2010, then the message will get through loud and clear that schedule is the priority. Today's Cincinnati Enquirer and Associated Press articles (see below) paint a bleak picture, safety-wise. Gene Branham, president of the Fernald Atomic Trades & Labor Council, was quoted as saying that "There have been so many near misses over the last eight or nine months, that if you look at the story line you can't help but conclude we're heading for a major accident." Unnamed Fluor officials are cited as acknowledging that recent violations could have killed workers, such as an incident where a 1,900-pound steel beam fell on a worker's foot, and another where a worker was standing directly under a crane that was moving 1,200 pounds of metal piping.
Some of the incidents reflect a lack of concern for spreading contamination, which surely doesn't make the folks who live near the plant feel like their potential health risks are being given any thought by anybody involved in the project. 14,000 neighbors of the site successfully sued the government for contaminating their drinking water and exposing them to radiation during the production years. One can imagine that these folks don't take kindly to the report that building wall panels weren't decontaminated during dismantlement, and that loose thorium dust was contaminating workers.
Fernald officials are scheduled to appear before the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board in Washington on October 5, to detail plans for improvement.
[Refs: Dan Klepal (Cincinnati Enquirer), "Fernald projects shut down; Management cites safety", The Cincinnati Enquirer, September 27, 2003; and Associated Press, "Report: Safety violations shut down work at two projects on Fernald site", September 27, 2003 3:30 PM ET]
September 25, 2003
First applications filed for Early Site Permits - Clinton, North Anna
No permits for new nuclear power stations have been issued in the United States since the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. But today, Exelon and Dominion filed applications requesting NRC approval for construction of a standardized design plant at their Clinton (Exelon) and North Anna (Dominion) sites. NRC's application review process is expected to take about 33 months. Each utility would then have twenty years (renewable to forty) to decide on and build a new plant at their site. The utilities have not decided if or when or what to build if their permit is approved. The USDOE contributed towards the cost of preparing the applications.
[Refs: Exelon press release, "Exelon Is the First to File an Early Site Permit Application With NRC", September 25, 2003 2:45 pm ET; and Reuters, "Utilities seek permits for possible nuke projects", September 25, 2003 6:13 pm ET]
British Energy agrees to sell its Amergen stake to FPL
FPL Group could become half owner of the Clinton, TMI-1, and Oyster Creek plants for $276.5 million. Current Amergen partner Exelon has 30 days to match the price, or to substitute half its own ownership stake in the sale to FPL. The price per megawatt is far below that paid by FPL for majority interest in Seabrook last year ($836.6 million).
[Source: John Dorschner (Miami Herald), "FPL to purchase half of three nuclear plants", Miami Herald, September 12, 2003]
Half mast
Let not the world misunderstand. Behind the soft sentiments on display today is a steely national resolve to rid the world of those responsible for the 9/11 attacks and those who aid and abet them. Please take a few minutes to read federal district court judge William Young's comments upon sentencing the shoe bomber wannabe who couldn't light the fuse. In the USA, Judge Young says, the very wind carries freedom. Beautiful stuff, this. His comments deserve much wider publicity than was provided by TV and newspapers. A heartfelt let-freedom-ring thanks to Judge Young for expressing our core value so well.
The orange bouys, a post-9/11 security measure, keep fisherman away from former favorite fishing spot - near Arkansas Nuclear One's intake canal on Lake Dardanelle. [photo courtesy of Russellville Courier]
* Canadian trash trucks turned back at border due to radiation detected by new monitors. Couldn't we exclude trash from NAFTA? If the people of Michigan want to import trash, nuclear.com wouldn't presume to intrude, but it seems even more inappropriate to insist that local landfills be open to all comers.
*
Did Nukes Just Get A Boost? The industry sees opportunity in the wake of the blackout
Business Week article describes one of the advantages of nuclear plants -- they're not turned on and off frequently, which means less stress on grid than typical gas plants. The author includes pro-and-con quotes about nuclear power, and concludes that, although nuclear power will continue to play a major role in US electric power generation, and it might just grow in importance.
September 1, 2003
Braidwood - lack of exercise hardened grease in (most) circuit breakers
Braidwood has a lot of circuit breakers, including about 3,000 of a "molded case" design known as Westinghouse adjustable magnetic HFB style, many of which are used on safety-related systems. The plant established a formalized testing program for these breakers some years ago, and identified that many of the breakers were failing the tests. In fact, of the 90 tested between June 2002 and June 2003, more than half failed. The problem appears to be that the grease inside the circuit breakers hardens over time. Westinghouse recommends cycling the breaker every month to move the grease around. This helps extend the operational life of the breaker. If left undisturbed, the grease will become quite like cement after as few as six or so years. Most of Braidwood's MCCBs were manufactured in 1970s-1980s. A recent NRC fire protection team evaluated the problem, and the plant's follow-up. The inspectors concluded that the plant should have had the grease problem under control long ago. NRC put out an information notice ten years ago describing the importance of exercising these breakers. The violation was categorized by NRC as a Non-Cited Violation. For more on this story, click here.
Source: Z. Falevits (Senior Reactor Inspector, NRC Region III), et al., Braidwood inspection report 50-456-2003-5, August 21, 2003
August 29, 2003
Korea talks - the happiest note
At a news conference after the six-country talks, China's Vice Foreign Minister Wang Yi said ÔThe parties agreed not to take any actions that will escalate the situation as long as discusions proceed.'
Please pardon your humble nuclear.com editor for not getting the warm-and-fuzzies from this quite pleasant plank of the agreement reached at the 6-party talks. Every day that the Korean bombmakers get to futz around as in the status quo seems like an escalatory act to me.
[Minister Yi quote source: Arab Times (Kuwait), "US had no intention to invade NK or seek regime change", August 30, 2003]
N. Korea - practice to deceive (practice, practice, practice)
Last fall, the US confronted North Korea with information showing that North Korea had launched a uranium-based nuclear weapons program. The Bush administration reported that North Korea confirmed that such a program existed to assistant secretary of state James Kelly, also last fall. Yesterday at the six-party talks in Beijing, however, North Korea deputy foreign minister Kim Yong Il said his nation has no such program. He reiterated his country's claim to have nuclear weapons, and said they would prove it to the world by conducting a nuclear test. He also asserted that North Korea has the means to deliver nuclear weapons. Many diplomats and technical experts are surely parsing Kim's various statements to try to get a handle on the truth of the matter. Your humble nuclear.com editor doubts that North Korea has even a single nuclear weapon, because they seem like the kind of folks who would've parlayed any such weapon into a much more credible blackmail threat by showing it off. The US hardline approach tends to suggest that the US government doesn't really think Korea yet has the bomb either, despite the repeated news reports that one or two big and crude weapons have been built.
[Ref: Associated Press, "Official: N. Korea vows to test nukes", August 29, 2003]
Undersized air-operated valve actuators have been a common problem in nuclear plants, sez Davis-Besse
Here's part of the section titled "Apparent Cause of Occurrence" from the Licensee Event Report (LER 50-346-2003-001-01) describing the finding that eight valves at Davis-Besse were not capable of performing their intended safety functions for all required conditions:
"Lessons learned from the nuclear power industry's motor-operated and air-operated valve programs indicate that AOV performance can be enhanced by improvements in valve and actuator sizing, setting, testing, and maintenance. It was found that during the original procurement cycle, many AOV actuators were undersized. This was a result of vendors being provided with inaccurate system conditions in combination with less than conservative sizing methodology used at the time, and a lack of formal calculations supporting the design basis and appropriate settings for AOV actuators. There was also the practice of sizing AOV actuators with minimum built-in margin. Similar analytical deficiencies resulted in the design of the air accumulators, used to provide a source of motive power in the event of a loss of non-safety related instrument air, not being sufficient to ensure the valves would perform their intended safety function under all design conditions. This apparent cause applies to valve CC1495."
Other causes were identified for the other seven valves. The full LER is available as a pdf.
August 28, 2003
Should private institutions, like day care, be required to have emergency evacuation plan?
A parent of a child enrolled in a private nursery school near TMI was surprised to learn that private day care centers and schools aren't required to have evacuation plans in the event of a nuclear plant emergency. He and a non-governmental organization have petitioned the NRC to require such facilities within ten miles of a nuclear plant be included in the emergency planning process. NRC expects to issue a decision on the petition by November 1. The state of Pennsylvania opposes the petition, because it believes it inappropriate to mandate such action by private institutions. There's nothing that prohibits private facilities from participating in the emergency planning process, and parents are free to choose the schools and day care centers that provide the level of preparedness that parents feel is appropriate for their situation. [Source: Martha Raffaele (AP writer), "Federal mandate sought for preschool evacuation plans", The Associated Press, August 28, 2003 12:05 AM Eastern Time]
Sequoyah-1 fails to scram on turbine trip test
The Associated Press is reporting tonight that an Alert was declared at Sequoyah unit 1 today, due to failure of the reactor to automatically shut down during a test. The plant was manually shut down, and the cause of the failure is being investigated. [Source: Associated Press, "TVA declares alert after Sequoyah reactor fails", August 28, 2003 7:13 PM Eastern Time]
Iran's tangled web
Samples taken at the Natanz site in July showed three discrete levels of U-235 above the natural proportion -- 0.71% -- found in uranium. The most-enriched sample was high enough to be considered HEU.
The publicly available information is inadequate to disprove the latest Iranian story, which is that the high readings are from contaminants left by whomever had used the centrifuges before Iran purchased them. If this is another of Iran's lies, it is understandable why they are not forthcoming about where the centrifuges came from. The enrichment process is quite amenable to detective work -- various U-235 enrichment levels are associated, in quite precisely predictable fashion, with other variables, such as U-234 and depleted uranium. If Pakistan or Russia were the source of the contamination, for example, they would likely still have have product or tail materials that assay out at levels corresponding to the Natanz samples.
Changing their story to include foreign source of used centrifuges was the only way to explain the presence of the enriched material on Iran's equipment without admitting to conducting enrichment in violation of treaty provisions. Whatever the truth of this particular matter, it is crystal clear that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapon capability and is quite at ease with repeatedly lying about it, and even admitting some of the lies when they find themselves tangled in the web-o-lies they've weaved.
nuclear.com has always had an optimistic bent. It's hard, however, to see even a hint of a glimmer of good coming out of this Iran situation.
August 27, 2003
More news from leaked IAEA Iran report
Iran told the IAEA in recent days that it had obtained technology for enriching uranium from unidentified foreign sources in the late 1980s, the report said. Iran had previously told the agency that it had developed the technology on its own, beginning in 1997.
Iran has previously told IAEA that it never used nuclear material in its research. But Iran acknowledged last week in a letter to the agency that it had undertaken uranium conversion experiments in the early 1990s.
An unamed senior Bush administration official was reported by the LA Times as saying: "We are disappointed that the IAEA did not come right out and say that the Iranians have been lying to them and have not been cooperating. I wish the IAEA could be more blunt about this, but the facts are in the report."
An unamed European diplomat was reported as telling the LA Times: "What seems clear is that Iran has got caught up in some lies and is giving ground grudgingly and slowly."
The Washington Post also quoted an unamed European diplomatic source: "In the past, Iran had claimed that the technology was indigenous, and they were quite proud of that. Now they're saying they did get a lot of help. This was a major change in the story."
[Sources: Douglas Frantz (LA Times staff writer), "Evidence May Indicate Iran Closing In on Nuclear A