NucNews - June 18, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- korea DPRK willing to rejoin six-party nuclear talks 2005-06-18 02:13:36 By Wang Mian (Xinhuanet) http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-06/18/content_3100511.htm SEOUL, June 17 -- The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) is willing to return to the six-party nuclear talks in July, if the United States recognizes and respects Pyongyang, said South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young on Friday. Chung made this remarks in a televised press conference on Friday evening, hours after his returning from a four-day Pyongyang visit where he met with the DPRK's top leader Kim Jong Il. The South Korean official and his 40-member government delegation attended a joint celebration held in Pyongyang to commemorate the 5th anniversary of the inter-Korean summit between South Korean former President Kim Dae-jung and the DPRK top leader Kim Jong Il in June 2000. "During the two-and-half-hour meeting with Kim Jong Il, we fully and deeply exchanged views on politics, economy, military and humanitarian issue, especially on the nuclear issue," Chung told reporters at the beginning of the press conference. Besides the meeting, Kim Jong Il also had lunch with Chung and other seven members from the South Korean government and civic delegations who were there to attend the joint celebration. Chung is the first South Korean senior official in the administration of South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun to meet the DPRK top leader. Chung said the atmosphere of the meeting is "very sincere, frank and honest." "On the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula, Kim Jong Il said denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula is the teachings of the deceased Kim Il Sung. The inter-Korean agreement on denuclearizingthe Korean Peninsula remains valid," Chung told reporters. South Korea and the DPRK ratified the Declaration on Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in February 1992. The South Korean official, who also serves as head of the South Korean National Security Council, quoted Kim Jong Il as saying that the DPRK "has never given up or rejected" the nuclear talks. "Chairman Kim Jong Il said the DPRK is willing to return to the six-party talks even in July, if the US intention of recognizing and respecting the DPRK is clear," Chung said, adding that Kim also said it needs further detailed negotiation between the DPRK and the United States over the resumption of the six-party talks. Kim Jong Il also gave "positive evaluation" to the recent Seoul-Washington summit, and said he will closely monitor the US subsequent attitude, according to Chung. "The DPRK is willing to return to the NPT (Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty) and receive inspection of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) after the solution of the nuclear issue. It is unnecessary for the DPRK to have nuclear weapons," Chung quoted Kim Jong Il as saying Chung said when he told Kim a multilateral security safeguard is better than a bilateral one between the DPRK and the United States, Kim replied "It is reasonable, (we) will discuss the proposal carefully in future." The South Korean official said Kim promised to give reply after carefully study of the "important proposal" raised by the South Korean government concerning the solution of the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula. However, Chung did not give detailed explanation to the so-called "important proposal" which was first put forward by South Korean delegation at inter-Korean vice-ministerial talks held in May. "Kim said there is no reason to harbor hard feelings about Mr. Bush...Kim further said he has thought well of the United States since the (former US President Bill) Clinton's administration," briefed Chung. Chung and Kim also made several agreements on improving inter-Korean exchanges. Under the agreements, the DPRK will send influential official to attend a joint celebration to be held in Seoul around Aug. 15 to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Korean Peninsula from Japan's colonial rule. The two also agreed to resume reunions of separated family members, reopen inter-Korean general-level military talks and opena direct flight route between Seoul and Pyongyang. Chung's meeting with Kim has attracted much attention from local and world media as the six-party nuclear talks have been suspended for almost one year. China, the DPRK, the United States, Russia, South Korea and Japan have convened three rounds of six-party nuclear talks in Beijing, making efforts to peacefully resolve the nuclear issue onthe Korean Peninsula. However, the fourth round of the multilateral talks failed to be convened in last September as the DPRK refused to attend the talks, citing US hostile policy. Local media has spoke highly of Chung-Kim's meeting, commenting it boosts the prospect of restarting six-party talks. -------- mideast Nuclear Pact Was Signed at Riyadh’s Initiative: Kurdi Arab News Saturday, 18 June, 2005 (11, Jumada al-Ula,1426 ) http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=65573&d=18&m=6&y=2005 JEDDAH, 18June 2005 — Saudi Arabia signed the Small Quantities Protocol (SQP) of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) on Thursday. Omar Kurdi, Saudi ambassador to Vienna, and Mohamed Al-Baradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), inked the protocol that exempts the Kingdom from nuclear inspections. Kurdi said the pact was signed at Riyadh’s initiative and the Kingdom would inform the global energy watchdog its use of nuclear energy for industrial and research purposes. The Foreign Ministry has earlier stated that Saudi Arabia does not have nuclear reactors and any banned fissionable material. “During the board meeting, no IAEA governor had demanded the Kingdom to allow greater inspections by the agency as the board knows that the nuclear material used for industrial and scientific research purposes will be small in quantity,” Al-Hayat Arabic daily quoted Kurdi as saying. Dr. Saleh Al-Athel, president of King Abdul Aziz City of Science and Technology, said the signing of the protocol reaffirmed Saudi Arabia’s commitment to international charters on peaceful use of nuclear energy. A Foreign Ministry official said Saudi Arabia signed the NPT protocol as part of its efforts to save the world from the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction and achieve the goal of peaceful coexistence of nations. -------- ukraine Chernobyl to become a tourist attraction 06/18/2005 12:40 Pravda http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/90/360/15666_chernobyl.html The dreadful place has an aura of strange awe-inspiring attraction Lots of ghastly memories will be quickly unearthed once you hear the name "Chernobyl" being mentioned. Many people can still remember the terrible disaster that shocked the world 19 years ago. However, the dreadful place has an aura of strange awe-inspiring attraction. These days the city where radiation rules and life forms are subject to weird mutations attracts not only researchers. Tourists are beginning to put Chernobyl on their maps too. Some time ago six tourists from Finland had the nerve to go sightseeing to Chernobyl. "It is hard to believe that 45 thousand people used to live in this city, now it looks so empty and unearthly," said one of the Finnish tourists after taking a walk around the city. According to Chernobylinterinform, a tourist agency in charge of "hot tours" to the ghost city, the location is becoming quite popular with tourists despite inconveniences and potential health risks. Being a restricted area, it tempts people to take a look at the piece of history. Marina Polyakova, representative of the above company, says that the area became available for sightseeing in 2002. Just a few visitors arrived that year. Around 870 tourists visited Chernobyl last year, roughly the same number of tourists is expected in 2005. Mary Mekje, the author of soon-to-be-published book titled Wormwood Forest. Natural History of Chernobyl calls the area "radioactive jungle." She believes the Chernobyl nuclear disaster created a forest preserve with wolves, wild boars, and birds of endangered species. According to her, "its beauty can not be overestimated." There are a number of reasons why people visit the "calamity zone." The young fellows from Finland, all of them in their twenties, say they just love exploring derelict locations. Chernobyl has hundreds of abandoned apartment buildings, farms and industrial facilities, a lot more than one can find in Finland. Other tourists are driven by their interest in the disaster or by their desire for personal inspection of the Soviet-era stills. The wind was rustling in the trees as the tourists were walking through the dead city. Dilapidated buildings, puddles and broken glass underfoot. When the tourists reached the ruins of an amusement park, the head of their group checked the radiation level. Geiger counter showed 144 microroentgen per hour at one location. The man took a few steps to the left and stood on the green moss for awhile. The readings then changed to 823 microroentgen per hour. Ukrainian guides make good money by taking tourists around Chernobyl and suburbs. Visitors are not allowed to walk about on their own. A one-day trip will cost them from $200 to $400. The city is all jungle now. Only local guides can drive around it without getting stuck in the quagmire. The site overlooking the nuclear plant and its "sarcophagus" of steel and concrete is the last stop for tourists. The time of the sarcophagus is running out fast. Now the international community is raising funds for the construction of a new anti-radiation protective system. (Translated by: Guerman Grachev http://english.pravda.ru/author/_116.htmld ) -------- u.n. Senate panel OKs nuke bomb study Matheson says he will battle against $4 million for 'bunker buster' work Saturday, June 18, 2005 The Utah Spectrum By DENNIS CAMIRE Our Capitol Bureau http://www.thespectrum.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050618/NEWS01/506180306/1002 WASHINGTON - Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, said Friday that he would continue to fight a Senate panel's move to pay for a study of a nuclear "bunker buster" weapon. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved $4 million for the Air Force to study a small nuclear weapon designed to penetrate deep underground to destroy enemy bunkers. It's included in a $31.2 billion spending bill for the nation's energy and water programs. The House approved its $29.7 billion energy and water bill May 24 but for the second year in a row did not include money for the weapon's study. Matheson said his top reason for wanting to fight against the $4 million study of the "bunker buster" was the potential that it could lead to testing the new weapons in Nevada. "We have a long history of that testing having created health problems and cancer deaths in Utah and other states," he said. "The government lied before about it, and I don't trust it now." The congressman also said he was concerned that the Pentagon was wasting money on new weapons systems that would never be used. "We ought to be spending money to develop new weaponry and innovations that would be used in the actual field of battle," he said. "I'm not convinced that we would ever want to use one of these ('bunker buster') weapons." A National Academies of Science report in May concluded that the use of such a weapon in an urban area could cause up to a million civilian casualties, even if design problems could be overcome. Matheson said there was a bipartisan group led by Rep. David L. Hobson, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee, fighting to keep the bunker buster study from being done. Hobson has been an outspoken opponent of the bunker buster for years and was successful in keeping it from being funded last year, Matheson said. "The House made it clear that emphasizing 'bunker busters' threatens public support for maintaining the deterrence value of our nation's nuclear stockpile in a way that threatens national security," Matheson said. "I support that conclusion." Matheson said he would continue to press for removal of the bunker buster money when House and Senate negotiators meet to work out the differences between their respective chambers' versions of the bill. Other funding in the Senate version of the bill includes $577 million for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository and $339 million for a mixed oxide fabrication facility to turn spent nuclear fuel and plutonium from dismantled nuclear weapons into fuel for nuclear reactors. Originally published June 18, 2005 -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- pennsylvania TMI Improves Training Saturday June 18, 2005 11:50am (AP) http://www.whtm.com/news/stories/0605/236729.html Middletown - Weaknesses in the training programs for control-room operators and others at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant have been corrected. That's according to the plant's owner, AmerGen. The weaknesses in training programs had landed the nuclear station on probation in December. But this week, a national nuclear board renewed the plant's accreditation for four years. Company officials say the renewal came after AmerGen made more than 450 adjustments to training and corrective action programs. Last year, a quarter of TMI's control room operating crews failed a test of their ability to safely shut down the nuclear reactor under adverse conditions. The NRC also noted other problems. This year, all the crews passed the test. -------- us nuc waste Goshute nuclear plan flayed About 50 in House sign letter opposing storage By Jerry Spangler Saturday, June 18, 2005 Deseret Morning News http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600142393,00.html WASHINGTON — More than four dozen Democratic House members have signed a letter written by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, urging the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject a license application by Private Fuel Storage to store spent nuclear fuel on Goshute tribal lands in Utah's Tooele County. Kucinich, who is still seeking co-signers for the letter to be sent next week, called the proposal "unjust, extremely dangerous and unnecessary. The history of exploitation and racism carried out towards Native Americans by the U.S. government is well documented, and we must not relive it." Among the signers is Rep. Shelley Berkley, a Nevada Democrat who is joining the PFS fight even though many in the Utah delegation have been lukewarm in supporting Nevada's opposition to a permanent spent-fuel waste dump at Yucca Mountain. None of the three Utah members of the House had seen the letter as of Friday, but all were supportive. "I applaud him for what he's doing," said Scott Parker, spokesman for Rep. Bishop, R-Utah. He added the Utah delegation has sent its fair share of letters to the NRC asking for the same thing. Charles Isom, spokesman for Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, said Cannon hasn't seen the letter but has signed similar letters by the delegation in the past. The staff of Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, is reviewing the letter. The congressman had not yet seen it. Kucinich, one of the few presidential candidates to campaign in Utah during the past election, said it "is unjust for the United States to target a destitute and vulnerable Native American tribe" and that the Skull Valley band of Goshutes possesses an "inextricable spiritual attachment to the land they inhabit, and many tribal members say it is all they have left." Despite the opposition voices of Kucinich and the others, the NRC is widely expected to ratify the recommendation of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) to grant PFS a license to store up to 40,000 tons of nuclear waste for up to 40 years at the site about 70 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. Utah officials, who have been fighting the proposal during the licensing process, recently lost another round before the ASLB to reconsider its earlier ruling. A consortium of nuclear power utilities that makes up PFS could begin shipments of spent fuel to Utah within another year or so, depending on the result of the state's inevitable court challenges to the license. Kucinich echoed what others critics, including Utah officials, have said for years. "This proposal is a safety risk to all Americans along the transportation routes to the proposed facility," he wrote. "Transporting casks cross-country creates the possibility of a potentially catastrophic radioactivity release due to an accident or terrorist attack." The letter says that nuclear waste could be a primary terrorist target and that handling and transportation of nuclear waste increases the likelihood of accidents. "Transportation routes proposed by rail, road and barge could pass through as many as 44 states and the District of Columbia, putting the waste within half a mile of 50 million people," he said. "Transportation of such high volumes of nuclear waste would put virtually every part of the country at risk." Kucinich also said dry casks like the ones that would be used in Skull Valley are an unproven technology and have had problems with hairline fractures, explosions due to chemical reactions and welding failures. "There is no good reason to construct this facility, but there are many reasons to oppose it. PFS' proposal is dangerous to Americans, violates the rights of the Skull Valley band of Goshutes and is not in our national interest," he wrote. ---- Nuclear 'waste' is valuable resource Your voice: G. Ivan Maldonado Saturday, June 18, 2005 Cincinnati Enquirer http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050618/EDIT02/506180350 [WANT YOUR VOICE HERE? Send your column or proposed topic, 400 words or fewer, along with a photo of yourself, to assistant editorial editor Ray Cooklis at letters@enquirer.com, "Your voice" in subject line.] Nearly 25 years after Congress called for construction of an underground nuclear waste repository, many Americans still don't comprehend that the "waste" is worth a fortune. The highly radioactive material that's usually called waste, stored at sites around the country in preparation for shipment to the repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, is actually used nuclear fuel. It contains uranium and plutonium that can be extracted to make new reactor fuel for generating electricity. It's an enormously valuable energy source that should be recycled, which would extend nuclear resources and reduce the costs of disposal and nuclear power. This would help nuclear power to meet the nation's increasing need for clean energy. There's nothing new about nuclear recycling: It's precisely what France, Germany, Belgium, Great Britain and Japan have been doing for many years. A House Appropriations Committee has directed the Department of Energy to accelerate a program that could lead to reprocessing of used nuclear fuel within a few years. Reprocessing also reduces the volume of nuclear waste to one-fifth its size, and reduces its toxicity. Indeed, it eliminates most of the waste from nuclear power generation. Instead of having to build another repository, there would be enough space in the Yucca Mountain facility to hold waste from nuclear power plants as well as from the U.S. defense program. Tens of billions of dollars would be saved. Reprocessing would need to be done differently than in the past. U.S. reprocessing work was halted in 1977 when President Jimmy Carter declared that the extraction of plutonium could lead to nuclear weapons proliferation. But researchers believe that the technology can be made proliferation-proof. Besides, the decision to halt U.S. reprocessing has not deterred rogue countries from seeking to establish nuclear arsenals. The opportunity to expand the use of nuclear power through reprocessing is a better and far more workable approach for achieving energy security than disposing used nuclear fuel as if it were waste. The effort in Congress to lift the ban makes sense: increase funding on research to make it proliferation-proof; don't hamper the expansion of nuclear power in the process; adjust future policy in response to technical progress. Dr. G. Ivan Maldonado is an associate professor in the Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Nuclear Engineering at the University of Cincinnati. -------- MILITARY -------- afghanistan -------- africa -------- -------- arms -------- -------- asia -------- -------- balkans -------- -------- biological weapons -------- -------- britain -------- -------- business -------- -------- chemical weapons -------- -------- china -------- -------- europe -------- haiti -------- iran -------- -------- iraq -------- -------- israel / palestine -------- -------- landmines -------- -------- latin america -------- -------- mideast -------- -------- nato -------- -------- pacific -------- -------- pakistan / india -------- -------- philippines -------- prisoners of war -------- puerto rico -------- -------- russia / chechnya -------- -------- space -------- -------- spies -------- -------- un -------- -------- us -------- -------- venezuela -------- war crimes -------- -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- courts / tribunals -------- death penalty -------- drug war -------- homeland security / national intelligence -------- human rights BUSH URGED TO MEET SAUDI, EGYPTIAN DISSIDENTS [MENL] Sat, 18 Jun 2005 http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2005/june/06_19_2.html WASHINGTON -- President George Bush has been urged to meet dissidents from Egypt and Saudi Arabia as part of an effort to encourage human rights and reform in those Arab countries. U.S. human rights groups have pressed the administration to increase the president's involvement in the promotion of human rights in the Middle East. The groups said Bush's message of support to dissidents in such countries as Iran and North Korea should be expanded to include Arab allies of the United States. Over the past week, human rights activists have met Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and discussed U.S. strategy to promote rights in the Middle East. Ms. Rice leaves on Friday for a tour of the region and plans to visit Egypt, Israel, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority and Saudi Arabia. The activists were said to have urged Ms. Rice to focus on human rights in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The secretary of state was handed a list of political prisoners in both Arab countries and asked to demand their release. -------- immigration / refugees -------- justice -------- police -------- prisons / prisoners -------- -------- terrorism -------- torture -------- POLITICS -------- budget -------- corruption -------- investigations -------- propaganda wars -------- -------- us politics -------- -------- voting -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy It's Getting Cheaper to Tap the Sun By BARRY REHFELD June 18, 2005 NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/18/business/18solar.html?pagewanted=print&oref=login Annette Benedict gave a party to celebrate the installation of solar panels on the roof of her Bronx home over a year ago. John Sunde bought three systems in three years for the two Long Island homes he owns - two for the Brentwood house he lived in and a third for a Hampton Bays home he lives in now. Susan Ferraro and her husband, Nick, featured their new network in the sales ad for their summer home on Shelter Island, N.Y., earlier this year. Excitement over residential solar energy may not be running this high everywhere, but providing homes with electricity and heat from the sun is getting more buzz than it has in decades. In the 70's it seemed that buyers of solar systems were mostly isolated tree huggers who somehow had a small fortune to spend on panels, but now urban and suburban homeowners are looking to the sun hitting their roofs for relief from rising electricity and heating costs. Higher utility bills, though, are just the stick. The carrot is the falling cost of solar systems that are lighter and more efficient and feature new designs, like solar panels that double as window awnings. Standardized installations and economies of scale for equipment production have helped drive costs lower. In moving toward the energy mainstream, solar expenses have dropped to around $8 a watt, from roughly $100 three decades ago; the cost is even less if a system is installed as part of a new home's construction. In either case, that puts the price of a system that can reduce electric bills significantly - like a three-kilowatt system - in the $20,000 range. That's still a lot of money, but buyers may be able to get a lot of it back immediately, through government incentives. And with energy prices rising, the payback period for the rest is getting steadily shorter. State programs developed in the last few years are making it possible for homeowners to cut the cost of a system by more than half, to less than $4 a watt. These programs include rebates, tax refunds and access to utility grids, enabling homeowners to sell excess electricity back to power companies. "Oil prices give people a reason to look, but then it's all about the incentives," says Gary Minick, president of Go Solar, in Riverhead, N.Y., who has been installing systems for 26 years. "I get eight calls a week now. I'm all booked." While incentives can be found across the country, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut tend to give good deals. Forty states allow selling excess power back to utilities, according to the Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy, and 19 offer rebates. Typically, California led the charge when one of its utilities opened its grid to homeowners over a decade ago. Within a few years, New York was establishing itself as an East Coast solar beachhead. Now more than 700 New York homeowners have solar energy systems hooked up to utilities. New York has also licensed some 50 solar equipment installers. "We've building for the long term," said Adele Ferranti, who works for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, which regulates solar installations. "We haven't had one failure for anything installed by the people we certify." On Long Island, Mr. Sunde's systems are working smoothly, and he expects them to keep doing so over their guaranteed 25-year life. A staunch environmentalist who had dreamed of owning solar panels since he was a boy, he now has more power than he needs. He couldn't have done it without the incentives. With rebates and tax refunds, he chopped nearly 75 percent off the $115,000 bill, bringing the cost down to $30,000. With about 7.5 kilowatts for each house, he wound up paying about $2 a watt. He did so well because Long Island kicked off New York's incentive programs with rebates of up to $6 a watt. Now it's in line with the rest of the state, offering $4, while the newer New Jersey program, is the most generous in the New York metropolitan area, with incentives of $5.50 a watt. Exactly how much electricity a system provides and how long it takes for an installation to pay for itself, though, depends on many factors besides costs and incentives. Also important is the amount of shade at a house, the pitch of a roof (25 degrees is good, and typical for the Northeast except in areas that get heavy snow), and the direction the roof faces. An additional factor is the amount of sunshine received, which depends on both latitude and average number of days with cloud cover. In Mr. Sunde's case, his new home has the edge over the old because its roof faces south. Over all, he calculates the payback period at a bit over 15 years. "It's worth it," he said. "There's nothing to break. No moving parts. When I've saved as much as it cost me in the first place, I'll have free electricity." Irene Pletka has two different solar energy systems at her Sag Harbor, N.Y., summer house. Copper tubing panels are used to heat her swimming pool, while silicon panels provide all the electricity for her home. The copper panels for the pool's heating are alongside the roof deck, and the silicon modules providing electricity are attached like awnings above a bank of first-floor windows to keep out the summer sun. Copper trumps silicon for heating. For one thing, it warms water directly, where silicon panels must first convert solar energy to electricity. While there are no rebates or tax breaks for thermal heating systems in New York, her $2,500 pool system will still pay for itself in about two seasons. "You're also not limited the way you are with oil," she said, "thinking about swimming too early or late in the season because of the fuel you may use up." A big challenge for solar heating comes during the winter, for the simple reason that the sun is around the least when it is needed the most. It is also difficult to heat interior space; hot air cannot be stored the way water can. Brian Flanagan, though, had special reasons for installing a solar heating system in the Brooklyn house he bought last year. The building had a boiler with only enough capacity to heat the commercial space he rented out on the ground floor; the upstairs was too big, with too many windows, to heat in the winter. Buying a small boiler and installing a roof-top solar unit with vacuum tubes (which do not lose heat the way copper tubes do) - plus large hot water storage tanks to save heat for a cloudy day - would, he reasoned, be more economical in the long run. The package cost $33,000 compared with $20,000 for a separate large boiler for his living space. But with lower heating bills, he expects the system to pay for itself in eight years. "I'm no longer a slave to oil prices," he said. "I pay a fifth of what my tenant pays." It's still too early, though, to tell if the added expense of solar equipment makes a home more valuable. Based on Susan Ferraro's experience selling her vacation home, the answer just might be: not yet. "We thought it very pioneering, and we put it in our ads, thinking people would think it was as exciting as we thought it was," she said of her year-old system. "But it never even came up, even with the people who bought the house." Some things will never change, though, like what got everyone interested in solar energy in the first place. "I read about it in a Sierra Club magazine," Annette Benedict said of her decision to install solar equipment. "It made sense. It was good for the environment." And good for her: she bought a piano with her rebate. -------- -------- energy -------- -------- OTHER -------- environment -------- -------- genetics -------- -------- health -------- -------- imf / world bank / wto (economics) -------- poverty -------- ACTIVISTS -------- --------