NucNews - September 27, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- accidents and safety Part of Dounreay closed following leak Tue 27 Sep 2005 The Scotsman http://business.scotsman.com/utilities.cfm?id=1998972005 A KEY part of the Dounreay nuclear plant was shut down yesterday, following a leak of radioactive liquid during decommissioning work at the complex. The cementation plant, a vital component in the management of the site's intermediate-level radioactive waste, had to be closed off after a "malfunction" led to a batch of spent fuel and a quantity of cement being spilled inside the shielded facility, operated by the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). Officials at the plant said the radioactive material had been contained within a suite of heavily shielded cells in the cementation plant and none of the workers at the plant had been harmed or exposed to radiation. A Dounreay spokesman said yesterday: "UKAEA has convened an investigation into the circumstances and the work required to restart the plant." -------- australia Uranium policy causes labour fission Katharine Murphy September 27, 2005 The Australian http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16732917%255E2702,00.html THE union representing uranium workers in the Northern Territory has dug in over its opposition to an expansion of the industry, deepening a split in the labour movement. Helen Creed, national president of the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union, said federal Labor should maintain its three-mines policy and any new mines would be opposed by her members. "We don't see any need to change Labor Party policy," Ms Creed said. "I don't see a move within LHMU to change our policy. Our position is a long-standing one which is opposition to uranium mining." The LHMU's national position puts it at odds with another of Australia's largest unions, the right-wing Australian Workers Union, which also covers uranium mining workers. AWU president Bill Ludwig said last week that his union would support Labor scrapping "three mines". Mr Ludwig also urged Queensland Premier Peter Beattie to axe Queensland's ban on uranium mining. The divisions follow a concerted push by Labor resources spokesman Martin Ferguson to expand uranium mining and generate debate over Australia's future energy needs. As part of a coming televised forum on nuclear energy, Mr Ferguson continues to argue for an expansion of the uranium industry. "I'm talking about reality. Have a look at what's happening in Asia. The growth and energy demand is just going through the roof," Mr Ferguson told the SBS television forum, to be screened tonight. But the LHMU's position has been to represent workers in the industry while maintaining ideological opposition to uranium mining. Ms Creed said the union's recent national council meeting had not considered any motions to change that position. A new poll shows Australians may be warming to the idea of domestic nuclear power, with more people supporting the concept than opposing it. A Newspoll taken for SBS shows that 47 per cent of people support using nuclear power for electricity generation, while 40per cent are opposed to it. Australian men are solidly in favour of nuclear power, with 60per cent of men in the 1200-person sample expressing support. Women were less enthusiastic, with only 35 per cent supporting nuclear electricity generation. But the community remains steadfastly opposed to importing nuclear waste from the countries that buy Australian uranium. More than four in five, or 83per cent, say they oppose bringing waste home. And a small majority, 53 per cent, oppose the Howard Government's efforts to export Australian uranium to China. The Howard Government has sparked a debate on nuclear power and uranium mining by arguing for a substantial expansion of the industry in Australia to take advantage of a trebling in the world price of uranium. Canberra is negotiating an export agreement with China which would see Australian uranium sold to Beijing for civilian use. But Australians are uneasy with the idea of selling uranium to China, according to the poll. Thirty-one per cent of the sample said they would support selling uranium to Beijing, while 53 per cent opposed the idea. -------- canada Ontario needs coal power alongside more nuclear power, union official says 10:12 AM EDT Sep 27 STEVE ERWIN Canadian Press http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/050922/b0922100.html TORONTO (CP) - Ontario's largest electricity union wants Premier Dalton McGuinty to break his election promise to close the province's coal-fired power plants, saying they'll be needed alongside new nuclear facilities to meet future demand. Don MacKinnon said his Power Workers' Union will launch a major media campaign next Tuesday that aims to win public support to keep the coal-fired plants open. MacKinnon argues coal-fired plants can be cleaned up and their usage reduced to help meet environmental targets as new nuclear power comes online a decade from now. But he said despite several meetings with McGuinty over the past two years, the premier is unwilling to budge from his stance that coal-fired facilities must close. "They didn't study it," MacKinnon said Wednesday of the Liberal's 2003 campaign promise to close Ontario's five coal-fired power plants. "Coal is cheap, we've got lots of it. We need to find a niche for it." Finding no support from the premier or Energy Minister Dwight Duncan, MacKinnon said he's moving to get the public's input. "We're telling everyone we can get an audience with to say, 'look, let's revisit this before it's too late,' " MacKinnon said. Unions, associations and lobby groups are vying for the premier's attention since he gave a speech last week that said he'll give the green light to build more nuclear plants in Ontario if that's what's needed to meet future electricity demand. McGuinty is awaiting a review of Ontario's supply mix by the Ontario Power Authority due Dec. 1. The premier has already taken heat for reneging on a promise to close all five of the province's coal generating stations by 2007. The last of the five - the giant Nanticoke generating station on Lake Erie, considered Ontario's worst polluter - is now expected to run until 2009. McGuinty says building replacement nuclear facilities is an option because he's not convinced technology to reduce emissions from coal-fired plants is good enough. Some energy sector experts say it will be difficult to close all coal facilities because of potential supply shortages. The province has largely exhausted its hydroelectric potential, wind and solar don't generate enough capacity, and new nuclear plants, if given the go-ahead, could take a decade or more to get online. The province believes Ontarians can reduce demand through conservation. But Murray Elston, president of the Canadian Nuclear Association, says that won't be enough. "The warning is clear: Ontario needs new electricity generation capacity within the decade, even if aggressive conservation targets are attained," Elston, a cabinet minister under former Premier David Peterson, said in a speech to the Empire Club in Toronto. Elston said new nuclear reactors can be constructed and added to the electricity grid in less than five years. But he said it takes five more years just to get through environmental and regulatory processes. He said too much red tape bog down the process, and blamed delays over environmental debates for helping create past cost overruns. "Once the go-ahead is given for new reactors, the actual construction work occurs relatively quickly," he said. The association says a new nuclear plant would provide a job boom, estimating it takes about 27,000 person-years of work for a single reactor. According to Ontario's Independent Electricity System Operator, more than half of the province's electricity generation last year came from nuclear plants. Nearly one-quarter came from hydroelectric facilities, while coal accounted for 17.5 per cent and natural gas supplied 6.5 per cent. ---- Pickering up and running – but is it enough? Nuclear unit in Pickering back in service for first time since 1997 FROM CANADIAN PRESS Sep. 27, 2005. 03:44 PM http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1127816319174&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968705899037&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes One of four reactors at Ontario’s Pickering A nuclear facility is back on line for the first time in nearly eight years, but it still won’t generate enough power to ease a potential supply crunch next summer, says a new report on the province’s energy supply. Ontario Power Generation said Unit 1 at the Pickering A plant began sending electricity to consumers again early last night and should be ready for wider commercial use within a few weeks. The reactor had been offline since December 1997 and was refurbished over the past 15 months at a cost of more than $1 billion — about $100 million more than initial budget estimates, said OPG chief nuclear officer Pierre Charlebois. The budget revision came after the province fired OPG’s top three executives in December 2003 for botching the restoration of Unit 4, which resumed service in September that year after costing $1.25 billion to fix, almost three times the original $457-million projection. Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator, manager of the province’s electricity system, said Unit 1 will add another 515 megawatts to the power grid next year. Also coming online are eight renewable energy projects, including 350 MW of wind power and 117 MW of gas-fired generation. With the added supply, Ontario will be able to meet its energy needs next summer under normal weather conditions, the IESO said. Another summer of sweltering heat, however, would strain the system and require more power imports regardless of the new supply. “During periods when the supply and demand situation is tight, such as conditions experienced this past summer, or during extreme weather conditions, Ontario will need good performance from generation within Ontario and will rely on imports from neighbouring markets,” the IESO said in its latest 18-month outlook. Record demand, transmission constraints and limited hydroelectric resources taxed Ontario’s grid to the limit this summer. Extreme heat had consumers and businesses running air conditioners constantly, while on the supply side, high demand in early summer meant water available for hydroelectric use was used up quickly and never replaced by rainfall. As a result, there were 12 days of public appeals to curb energy use and 23 emergency alerts issued by the IESO this summer. Voltage was reduced by five per cent for 13 hours during two days in August. “This is clearly a situation that we cannot afford to repeat in the summer of 2006,” said Paul Murphy, IESO’s chief operating officer. Ontario electricity demand hit an all-time peak of 26,160 MW on July 13, surpassing the previous record of 25,414 MW reached in August 2002. The IESO estimates that under extreme weather conditions, demand could set a new record next summer of 27,378 MW. The Ontario government has acknowledged that it needs to add new, base supply to the province’s energy grid over the next few years to meet future demand. Premier Dalton McGuinty said earlier this month he’ll agree to build new nuclear plants if that’s what’s called for by the Ontario Power Authority, which is reviewing the province’s energy supply. The OPA’s report is due Dec. 1. OPG is lobbying for a role in the province’s nuclear future, despite past cost overruns and uncertainty about whether the province will look to the private sector instead of the publicly controlled corporation of which it is the sole shareholder. “Once the government decides on a path forward, OPG will be happy to participate if we’re asked to do so,” Charlebois said Tuesday. OPG, which has already determined that it’s not worth the cost to refurbish Pickering A’s units 2 and 3, is mulling whether to refurbish Pickering B’s four nuclear units. Charlebois said OPG would need a commitment by 2009 for a “significant investment” in Pickering B so it can begin retrofits there in 2013 or 2014. ---- Nuclear plants backed in poll RICHARD BRENNAN QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU Sep. 27, 2005. 01:00 AM http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1127771420179&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968705899037&t=TS_Home More than 40 per cent of Ontario residents believe the province should have more nuclear power plants, not fewer, according to an SES Research survey. The survey, completed Sept. 19, coincides with growing interest by the Liberal government in building new nuclear plants. In the survey of 504 people, 41 per cent supported more nuclear power for the province's future energy need, while 27 per cent said the current level is fine and 23 per cent agreed Ontario should use less nuclear power. Nine per cent had no opinion. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.4 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Ontario's shortage of electricity made headlines many times during the hot humid summer, especially when there were threats of rolling blackouts. Even so, environmentalists have come out strongly against resorting to more nuclear energy. Queen's Park Bureau -------- india Indian and US navies hold biggest-ever war games, avoid nuclear issues GOA, India (AFP) Sep 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050927090429.s4ockn8u.html The biggest-ever joint naval exercises between India and the United States went into high gear Tuesday but the war games in the Arabian Sea steered clear of thorny issues such as simulated nuclear combat, officials said. The 10-day event codenamed "Malabar" began when the 1,092-foot (333-metre) aircraft carrier USS Nimitz led two American Aegis-class destroyers into Indian waters on Sunday. "One part of our war games was over when the two navies met at mid-sea when the exercises began and now we are engaging in comprehensive manoevers," Indian Navy spokesman Captain A.K. Lambhate said in India's western resort of Goa, a nerve centre for the exercises. The nuclear-powered Nimitz, which carries 40 jets and 6,000 crew and is armed with RAM and Sparrow missile launchers, is the first US carrier to take part in joint exercises with nations outside the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. "This is a great mission as it enhances mutual confidence-building measures, streamlines procedures for the future and will help both countries across a wide canvas," said Lambhate, as the ships practised anti-submarine warfare. The joint exercise is the eighth in a series between the two navies and involves F-18 Hornets from the US side and British-designed Sea Harriers, which Tuesday flew several sorties from the deck of India's solitary aircraft carrier INS Viraat. An unspecified number of German-designed submarines backed the Indian fleet, an official said by telephone from the decks of a participating Indian missile destroyer. "Activities such as interdiction, information exchange, anti-piracy and operations to halt unauthorised transportation of weapons are under way but NBC (nuclear, biological chemical warfare exercises) is not on the agenda," said another official, who did not want to be named. "These still remain a thorny issue with them (the US)," he added. The United States imposed sanctions including restrictions on transfer of dual-use technology after India conducted nuclear weapons tests in May 1998. Washington eased some of the sanctions after India pledged its support to its global campaign against terrorism following the September 11, 2001 attacks. Indian naval spokesman Lambhate said the major action was still to come. "(From) 30th September onwards the major part of the exercises will commence and will continue until the exercises end on October 4. There'll be a lot of activity in that period," he said without elaborating. Washington has held several joint military exercises with Indian defense forces over the past three to four years. The United States and India signed a landmark agreement in January to share advanced technology, including for peaceful nuclear applications. In June defense ministers of India and the United States signed a 10-year accord paving the way for joint weapons production, cooperation on missile defense and the possible lifting of remaining US export controls on sensitive military technologies. ---- Indian, Iranian officials meet after nuclear vote NEW DELHI (AFP) Sep 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050927174416.wk651z0l.html A senior Indian official met Tuesday with Iran's ambassador to New Delhi after India supported efforts to haul Tehran before the UN Security Council for violating international nuclear safeguards. Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran "explained that New Delhi's vote for the resolution was aimed at averting a major confrontation between Iran and the international community," the Press Trust of India news agency reported. Iran's ambassador to New Delhi S Z Yaghoubi "expressed disappointment over the resolution" saying that it was "not logical," the report said quoting an Iranian embassy spokesman. Their meeting came on a day when Tehran said it would send letters of objections to the 22 nations that supported the action and reevaluate its economic relations with them. India, which imports about 70 percent of its crude oil needs, is banking on Iran for liquefied natural gas imports to secure energy supplies to fuel its economic growth. In June, India signed a deal worth 22 billion dollars for Tehran to supply five million tonnes of liquefied natural gas annually over a 25-year period from 2009. New Delhi is also negotiating the contruction of a multi-billion dollar gas pipeline from Iran through Pakistan. The IAEA's 35-nation board of governors found Iran on Saturday in non-compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty and said a report would eventually have to be filed to the Security Council, to "correct" its view of the Islamic republic. -------- russia Russia ready to join US-led uranium fuel bank VIENNA (AFP) Sep 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050927170922.ut94kofa.html Russia said Tuesday it is ready to join the United States in creating a bank of uranium fuel for countries that pledge not to make enriched uranium but only if there is an international mandate. "We support this American initiative," Alexander Rumyantsev, who is head of the Russian federal nuclear agency, said in Vienna. But he said it should be "incorporated in international agreements" since current US-Russian efforts to turn weapons-grade highly enriched uraniuminto low-enriched uranium (LEU) were governed under a bilateral, US-Russian political agreement. The fuel bank should be overseen by the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency, Rumyantsev said. He was speaking to reporters at a general conference in Vienna this week of the IAEA's 139 member states. "The IAEA is the organization that will have to develop the regulations and rules for such a mechanism," he said. The United States is ready to convert HEU into LEU, which does not have a proliferation risk, and offer it to countries which give up the enrichment process, US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Monday in a statement read out on his behalf. A senior US diplomat said the offer was made in order to "kick-start" the creation of a multinational fuel bank so that countries could have access to nuclear fuel without having the capability to make it themselves. The diplomat said it was not yet determined, however, who would participate, where the bank would be, who would run it or how it would be run. Besides the United States, the other countries which produce enriched uranium for commercial use are France, Russia, Japan, Brazil, China and the Netherlands, Germany and Britain in the Urenco consortium. There was however agreement that the so-called "break-out" capability, when nations are capable of enriching uranium, is a proliferation risk since HEU can be either fuel for reactors or bomb material. LEU, which is also reactor fuel, is not a direct bomb risk. Both US President George W. Bush and IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei have made proposals to create an international fuel service but details have not been made clear. ElBaradei said Monday in opening the IAEA conference that he was "convinced that a key to strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime lies in arresting the dissemination of sensitive fuel cycle activities and the development of a framework for multilateral management of such activities." But the ability to control supply is limited since there is currently an abundant amount of enriched uranium on the world market. The senior US diplomat said Bodman was trying to deliver the message "that the United States strongly supports the peaceful use of nuclear energy." The diplomat said the exact amount of HEU the United States is ready to "blend down" is 17.4 metric tons, which is enough for hundreds of atom bombs and would make enough low enriched uranium to power 10 nuclear reactors. The HEU is an amount "currently in the US inventory but declared in excess of national security needs." The blended-down LEU will be "available about 2009." IAEA officials said they had been alerted to the US offer but had not yet studied it. ---- Highly Enriched Uranium Transferred to Russia from Czech Republic 27 September 2005 U.S. State Department http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2005&m=September&x=20050927162942xlrenneF0.7894556&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html Repatriation of radioactive material is part of Global Threat Reduction Initiative The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced September 27 that 14 kilograms of highly enriched uranium (HEU) that could be used for nuclear weapons were returned safely to the Russian Federation from the Czech Technical University in Prague. The Czech Republic worked with the United States, Russia and the International Atomic Energy Agency to return the HEU to a secure facility in Dimitrovgrad, Russia, where it will be down-blended to low-enriched uranium. This is the eighth successful shipment of uranium returned to Russia under the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, according to DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). To date, approximately 122 kilograms of fresh HEU have been repatriated to Russia from Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Libya, Uzbekistan, the Czech Republic and Latvia. This is the second shipment of fresh HEU fuel from the Czech Republic this fiscal year. (See related article.) NNSA has issued a fact sheet reviewing ongoing cooperative efforts by the United States and Russia to upgrade the security of Russia’s nuclear facilities. (See related article.) Following is the September 27 announcement on the repatriation of the HEU from the Czech Republic: (begin text) U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration September 27, 2005 HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM RECOVERED FROM CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY HEU Fuel Returned to Russia, Reactor Conversion Process Underway PRAGUE - The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced today that 14 kilograms of highly enriched uranium (HEU) were safely and securely returned to the Russian Federation from the Czech Republic today under NNSA's Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) program. The secret operation from the Czech Technical University in Prague was a joint effort between the United States, the Czech Republic, the Russian Federation, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The shipment was part of the prioritized, accelerated schedule implementing a key element of the Bush-Putin Bratislava Joint Statement on Nuclear Security Cooperation. "The return of this highly enriched uranium is an important milestone in the administration's Global Threat Reduction Initiative campaign to reduce stockpiles of this high-risk, vulnerable material worldwide," said NNSA Administrator Linton F. Brooks. "It was only with the strong cooperation of the Czech Republic, Russia and IAEA that we were able to successfully complete this critical international nonproliferation project. In particular, I would like to congratulate the Czech Technical University for its assistance regarding this shipment." The HEU, which could be used for nuclear weapons, was airlifted under guard from an airport near Prague, Czech Republic, to a secure facility in Dimitrovgrad, Russia, where the material will be down-blended to low enriched uranium (LEU). The United States has provided security upgrades at the facility in Russia under NNSA's U.S.-Russian Material, Protection, Control and Accounting Program. Yesterday, during the first day of the two-day operation, approximately 14 kilograms of HEU were loaded into three specialized Russian transportation containers. IAEA safeguards inspectors and U.S. technical experts were present at the university to monitor the process of loading the fuel into the canisters. Today, a Russian airplane transported the HEU fuel back to Russia. The HEU, originally supplied to the Czech Republic by the Soviet Union, was used as fuel for the Department of Nuclear Reactors of the Czech Technical University in its VR-1 Sparrow research reactor. The repatriation of the HEU fuel from the VR-1 research reactor was part of the joint effort between the NNSA, the Russian Federation and the IAEA to convert the VR-1 reactor to operate on LEU fuel and supply new LEU fuel to the university. The VR-1 research reactor is the first Soviet-/Russian-supplied research reactor to convert to LEU fuel. At the end of July, the HEU fuel was discharged from the reactor in preparation for return to Russia. U.S. and Czech technical specialists conducted all necessary calculations to assure safe and efficient operation of the VR-1 research reactor using LEU fuel. This is the eighth successful shipment of uranium returned to Russia under NNSA's GTRI program. To date, approximately 122 kilograms of fresh HEU have been repatriated to Russia from Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Libya, Uzbekistan, the Czech Republic, and Latvia. This is the second shipment of fresh HEU fuel from the Czech Republic this fiscal year and highlights the aggressive efforts of the GTRI program. With the successful completion of this mission, all Russian-origin fresh HEU fuel designated for repatriation has been removed from the Czech Republic. The mission of the GTRI is to identify, secure, recover and/or facilitate the final disposition of high-risk vulnerable nuclear and radiological materials around the world as quickly as possible. NNSA enhances U.S. national security through the military application of nuclear energy, maintains the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile, promotes international nuclear nonproliferation and safety, reduces global danger from weapons of mass destruction, provides the U.S. Navy with safe and effective nuclear propulsion, and oversees its national laboratories to maintain U.S. leadership in science technology. (Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov) -------- security UN database shows 121 nuclear trafficking incidents in 2004 VIENNA (AFP) Sep 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050927185551.8o53h10q.html Countries reported 121 incidents to the UN atomic agency in 2004 of illicit trafficking involving nuclear materials, the agency said Tuesday. But the statistics from the International Atomic Energy Agency's Illicit Trafficking Database (ITDB) showed only one incident since 2003 that involved weapons-grade material, which can be either highly enriched uranium (HEU) or plutonium. This was in June 2003 when an individual was arrested in possession of 170 grams of HEU, attempting to illegally transport it across a border. During the two-year period 2003-2004, the number of incidents reported by countries substantially increased compared with previous years. "Improved reporting may in part account for it," the IAEA said in a press release. "The majority of the incidents reported in 2003-2004 showed no evidence of criminal activity," it said. The IAEA has been compiling statistics on trafficking since 1993 but the reliability of its findings is questionable as the database "only has what countries voluntarily report," a diplomat close to the agency said. The database started in 1993 with 25 countries and now has 82, an IAEA spokesman told AFP. The IAEA, the UN's atomic monitoring agency, has 139 member states. "It is voluntary. It is not comprehensive but it is the best database available publicly on illicit trafficking," the spokesman said. He said IAEA officials also check on trafficking from open-source materials, such as the Internet, and then check with countries about the incidents. In the past 12 years there were a total of 220 incidents involving nuclear materials, the press statement said. Most of these "involved low-grade nuclear materials, mostly in the form of reactor fuel pellets, and natural uranium, depleted uranium and thorium." The statement said that: "While the quantities of these materials have been rather small to be significant for nuclear proliferation or use in a terrorist nuclear explosive device, these cases are indicative of gaps in the control and security of nuclear material and nuclear facilities." It said the "majority of confirmed incidents with nuclear materials recorded during 1993-2004 involved criminal activity, such as theft, illegal possession, illegal transfer or transaction." The incidents show black market demand for nuclear materials. "Where information on motives is available, it indicates that profit seeking is the principal motive behind such events," the statement said. There were also from 1993-2004, a total of 424 incidents "involving other radioactive materials mostly in the form of radioactive sources." These sources can be from medical and other uses which are less tightly controlled than nuclear reactor fuel, for instance, and are the sort of material that can be used in "dirty bombs," which are conventional explosives with radioactive material wrapped around them and which are designed to cause panic as much as to hurt, the statement said. But it said that radiation levels in most of the materials reported "were too low to pose serious radiological risk if used for malicious purposes." However, the overwhelming majority of incidents involving "dangerous" sources were reported over the last six years. ---- Countries reported 121 incidents to the IAEA in 2004 Agence Internationale de l'Energie Atomique News Press 2005 - 27/09/2005 - 16h35 TV5 http://www.tv5.org/TV5Site/info/regards_communiques_article.php?id_signal=2&id_zone=76&NPID=FR165257 France Countries reported 121 incidents to the IAEA in 2004 of illicit trafficking and other unauthorized activities involving nuclear and other radioactive materials, newly released statistics from the Agency's Illicit Trafficking Database (ITDB) show. The ITDB report also shows that one incident was reported since 2003 that involved fissile material -- highly enriched uranium (HEU) or plutonium -- that is needed to make a nuclear weapon. It occurred in June 2003 when an individual was arrested in possession of 170 grams of HEU, attempting to illegally transport it across the border. During the two-year period 2003-2004, the number of incidents reported by States substantially increased compared with previous years. "Improved reporting may in part account for it," the report said. "The majority of the incidents reported in 2003-2004 showed no evidence of criminal activity." The Past Twelve Years: 1993 - 2004 Nuclear Weapons Grade Material Since the database started in 1993, there have been eighteen confirmed incidents involving trafficking in HEU and plutonium. A few of these incidents involved seizures of kilogram quantities of weapons-usable nuclear material but most involved very small quantities. In some of the cases the seized material was allegedly a sample of larger quantities available for illegal sale or at risk of theft. More than two dozens incidents involved trace amounts of plutonium sources. Nuclear Materials In the past twelve years, 220 incidents involved nuclear materials. The majority of confirmed cases with nuclear materials involved low-grade nuclear materials, mostly in the form of reactor fuel pellets, and natural uranium, depleted uranium and thorium. While the quantities of these materials have been rather small to be significant for nuclear proliferation or use in a terrorist nuclear explosive device, these cases are indicative of gaps in the control and security of nuclear material and nuclear facilities. The majority of confirmed incidents with nuclear materials recorded during 1993-2004 involved criminal activity, such as theft, illegal possession, illegal transfer or transaction. Some of these incidents indicate that there is a perceived demand for such materials on the "black market." Where information on motives is available, it indicates that profit seeking is the principal motive behind such events. Radioactive Materials From 1993-2004, a total of 424 incidents were reported involving other radioactive materials mostly in the form of radioactive sources. Radioactive sources are used worldwide in a host of legitimate applications while measures to protect and control their use, storage or disposal are much less strict than those applied toward nuclear materials. In the hands of terrorists or other criminals, some radioactive sources could be used for malicious purposes, for example in a radiological dispersal device or "dirty bomb." Uncontrolled radioactive sources also have the potential to harm human health or the environment. Unlawfully discarded or disposed of radioactive sources, when melted at scrap metal recycle plants, may lead to severe environmental and economic related consequences. The majority of incidents involved radioisotopes and portable radioactive sources used for various industrial applications, such as gauging or radiography. Activity levels of the majority of these sources were too low to pose serious radiological risk if used for malicious purposes. About 50 incidents involved high-risk "dangerous" radioactive sources, which present considerable radiological danger if used in a malicious act. The overwhelming majority of incidents involving "dangerous" sources were reported over the last six years. The IAEA´s illicit trafficking database was set-up to facilitate the exchange of authoritative information on incidents of illicit trafficking and other related unauthorized activities involving nuclear and other radioactive materials among States. Over the years its purpose has expanded to maintaining and analysing this information to identify common trends and patterns. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- nevada Nevada files opposition to Yucca rail corridor land restrictions ASSOCIATED PRESS September 27, 2005 http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/text/2005/sep/27/092710033.html LAS VEGAS (AP) - The federal Energy Department hasn't laid the proper groundwork to justify restricting public land use along a proposed railroad corridor to Yucca Mountain, Nevada argues in a statement opposing the plan. "It's poor planning and the wrong agency is in charge," Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, said Tuesday of the Energy Department plan to build a railroad to haul radioactive waste across the state. Loux filed a seven-page letter Friday opposing the Energy Department proposal to withdraw 308,600 acres from public use across parts of Lincoln, Nye and Esmeralda counties. Public comments end Wednesday. "Apart from causing impacts and disruption to existing land users, the proposed action has the potential to negatively affect the environment, grazing allotments, mining and energy development activities, property values, the economy, important cultural resources and more," the state said. The state also argued the Energy Department should let the Bureau of Land Management and the federal Surface Transportation Board conduct the needed studies, and called on the department to withdraw its assessment and conduct a full environmental impact study. The department held public hearings this month in rural Nevada, and as of Monday had received 30 comments on its proposal, Energy Department spokesman Allen Benson said. The plan is to remove from public use a mile-wide swath stretching 319 miles, dubbed the Caliente Corridor. The Energy Department proposes to forbid new mining claims and prevent the BLM from selling property on the parcels that would be withdrawn for 10 years. Federal officials have said current mining claims, grazing permits, water rights and public access would not be affected. In its environmental assessment, the Energy Department projected minimal disruptions from the land withdrawal. It said engineers plan to photograph land features and conduct field surveys to narrow specific routes for the nuclear waste railroad. No rail line currently runs to the site the Bush administration and Congress picked in 2002 to entomb 77,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste now stored at nuclear reactors and military facilities in 39 states. The Energy Department announced in April 2004 that it intends to build the rail line from Caliente, a small town 150 miles northeast of Las Vegas, to the Yucca Mountain site, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Department estimates have put the cost at $880 million. Arguments are scheduled Oct. 18 in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on a state request to halt planning for the rail line until more studies are done. On the Net: Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects: http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov -------- north carolina New Nuclear Plant in Fayetteville? 09/27/05 -- ABC Eyewitness News http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=central&id=3483142 (FAYETTEVILLE) - Progress Energy says it wants to meet future energy demands with a new nuclear power plant in North Carolina. At least one city wants it in their backyard. Fayetteville leaders say they want the new plant in Cumberland County. Environmentalists say the county does not have the water supply or adequate terrain for a nuclear plant. Progress Energy has not made a decision about a possible location. The company operates two nuclear plants in the state, including the Shearon Harris Plant in Wake County. -------- pennsylvania TMI operator spends $500,000 to show it is serious about security Thursday, September 29, 2005 BY GARRY LENTON Of The Harrisburg, PA, Patriot-News http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/112798565351180.xml&coll=1 Security at a second but little-used entrance to the Three Mile Island nuclear plant has been fortified by the addition of a vehicle checkpoint. The change comes as the plant prepares to shut down for refueling in October. Plant operator AmerGen spent about $500,000 on the checkpoint, which will be used by contractors and their employees during the refueling process, said Ralph DeSantis, a spokesman for AmerGen. The safeguard is identical to one installed at the main entrance on the north end of the island last year. Vehicles entering the island from the south side will be stopped by an armed guard, and the driver will be required to get out of the vehicle while it is checked for explosives. Two heavy gates and a third barrier made of heavy steel block entrance to the protected area of the plant. Two of the gates must be opened remotely by a guard inside a bullet-proof enclosure about 100 yards away, said Derwin B. Westbrook, chief of security at AmerGen. "The main purpose is to identify a vehicle that is trying to deliver a vehicle bomb" to the site, Westbrook said. In the four years since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, plant owner Exelon Nuclear has spent more than $100 million on security improvements at its 10 nuclear power plants. The company also owns the Peach Bottom plant in York County and the Limerick plant in Montgomery County. The security systems were required by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and are designed to prevent intruders from causing a meltdown. The new checkpoint is expected to process about 10 vehicles a day during the outage, which is scheduled to begin in October and last about three weeks. About 1,200 temporary workers -- mostly electricians, carpenters and engineers -- will use the south entrance to TMI to get to their work sites, DeSantis said. Most will park their cars outside of the protected area of the plant and will not go through the checkpoint. The south entrance of the plant will be used only during refueling, which is done every two years. Guards will man the checkpoint only during those periods, DeSantis said. The upgraded security has drawn praise from nuclear watchdog groups, including Three Mile Island Alert, who have called for more protection for over a decade. "I do believe the addition of guard towers [in 2004] gave the advantage back to the guard force and that they can now handle commando attacks," said Scott Portzline, of Harrisburg, who has spent years studying nuclear plant security. However, he said, he would feel better if a guard would remain at the bridge at the south entrance when the refueling is completed. GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com -------- MILITARY -------- business Justice probes maker of defective bulletproof vests By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY, Updated 9/27/2005 12:35 AM http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-09-26-bodyarmor_x.htm WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has launched a criminal probe into whether a company knowingly provided defective bulletproof vests to President Bush, first lady Laura Bush and the Defense Department, two federal law enforcement officials said Monday. The officials, who declined to be named because they are prohibited from commenting on ongoing investigations, said Second Chance Body Armor Inc. is being investigated for possible fraud. One official said the probe could involve more serious charges if it is determined the company — the nation's largest maker of body armor — knew that the vests were unsafe. The Justice Department inquiry was first reported Monday by the Associated Press. Problems came to light two years ago when the Michigan-based company recalled 130,000 vests because of degradation problems with Zylon, a bullet-resistant fabric used in its vests. The vests were upgraded and returned. But in June the company issued a bulletin to police departments warning that its vests could fail and result in "serious injury or death." It estimated that about 100,000 of its vests remained in circulation. Among the past buyers of the vests was the Secret Service, according to a deposition given this month by the company's former research chief, Aaron Westrick. Westrick said the Secret Service bought the vests for its agents and for the president and first lady beginning with the 2001 inauguration. The Secret Service said it would not discuss its security measures for the Bushes. Also a customer was the Pentagon, which bought vests for elite troops, Westrick said. Douglas Wagner, a lawyer representing Second Chance in its civil litigation, said the company would cooperate with the government's inquiry. "Our main message has been that the Zylon-based body armor is defective and needs to be replaced," Wagner said. The Westrick deposition, a portion of which was obtained by USA TODAY, involves a lawsuit filed by the family of a California police officer who was killed in 2003 while wearing one of the company's vests. Westrick testified in the deposition that he had told Second Chance in a 2001 memo about problems with the vests. "Lives and credibility are at stake," Westrick wrote in urging the company to notify customers of the degradation problem. The company is now in federal bankruptcy court and dealing with 11 lawsuits over the quality of the vests. One of the lawsuits has been joined by the Justice Department. -------- uzbekistan U.S. Forces Leaving Base in Uzbekistan By MANSUR MIROVALEV The Associated Press Tuesday, September 27, 2005; 5:30 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/27/AR2005092700957_pf.html TASHKENT, Uzbekistan -- A senior State Department official said Tuesday the president of Uzbekistan made it clear that American forces must leave their air base in the Central Asian country, and the U.S. intends to do so "without further discussion." The demand came as relations soured following U.S. criticism of Uzbekistan's crackdown on anti-government protesters in May in the eastern city of Andijan. "The Uzbek government made it clear that we need to leave the base, and we intend to leave it without further discussion," Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried told reporters after meeting with President Islam Karimov. In July, the Uzbek government invoked a provision of the basing agreement with the United States that requires all American forces to leave within six months. "We respect the deadline," Fried said, referring to the 180-day provision for leaving that Uzbekistan invoked July 29, according to a State Department official in Washington. The former Soviet republic hosted the U.S. troops for operations in Afghanistan in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. U.S. officials did not immediately provide the number of U.S. troops at the Uzbek base. The United States intends to pay a nearly $23 million bill to Uzbekistan for use of the base for almost four years. Fried said the sum "is not a price for the right to have a base, it is a payment for material services provided by the Uzbek side." "The United States and Uzbekistan have had a very difficult period in relations complicated by grave concerns regarding the human rights situation and events in Andijan," Fried said. He dismissed as "ludicrous and non-credible" the allegations made by defendants in the ongoing trial of 15 men suspected of involvement in the May 13 Andijan revolt that the U.S. Embassy in Tashkent provided money to those who plotted the rebellion. "We are not to be accused of an intention to establish an Islamic caliphate in Uzbekistan," Fried said, referring to the Uzbek authorities' claim that the defendants had planned to establish an Islamic state. Uzbek authorities hope the carefully choreographed trial will refute accusations that government troops fired on a crowd of protesters in Andijan, killing hundreds, and support its contention that extremist Islamic groups from abroad encouraged the protest. Human rights groups allege that the confessions were coerced through torture. "I made it clear we support civil society and NGOs around the world," Fried said, commenting on the recent shutdown of two American aid groups in Uzbekistan. "I regret NGOs are under pressure from the Uzbek government." The uprising in Andijan began when militants seized a prison and freed 23 businessmen who were on trial for alleged Islamic extremism. The attackers also seized a local administration building and took hostages, as thousands of demonstrators gathered in an adjacent square to press economic and social grievances. Human rights groups and refugees who fled to Kyrgyzstan claimed that the revolt led to a brutal government crackdown that killed more than 700 people, mostly civilians shot while trying to flee. The government said 187 people died, mostly militants. Karimov, a hard-line autocrat, has ruled Uzbekistan since the Soviet era. -------- POLITICS -------- propaganda wars The Politics of Distraction By Dan Froomkin Special to washingtonpost.com Tuesday, September 27, 2005; 1:19 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/09/27/BL2005092700946_pf.html President Bush yesterday called for Americans to cope with gasoline shortfalls by cutting down on their driving. And he continued to push for increased military authority in national disasters. What do these two campaigns have in common? They're both red herrings, to some extent -- distractions in the wake of the shockingly botched government response to Hurricane Katrina. Consider this, for instance: There is no gasoline shortfall. And a broad range of experts agree that putting the military into a position to enforce martial law is not only unnecessary, it's dangerous. The Pentagon itself opposes the idea. And under existing rules, the president has ample discretion to send troops in to help disaster victims already -- discretion that he chose not to use for Katrina, but used amply for Rita. One fair test of how seriously Bush takes his new energy conservation kick will be whether he exercises any self-restraint. But don't expect cardigans or thermostat-lowering in this White House. Bush's gas-guzzling motorcade was whizzing all over town yesterday -- and today he flies off in his fuel-gulping 747 for his seventh trip to the Gulf Coast since Katrina struck a month ago. A Call for Conservation Hurricane Rita had less impact than expected on oil and gas production. And the Bush administration has consistently opposed calls for conservation in the past. So why now? It's not at all clear. Here is the text of Bush's remarks about energy yesterday morning. David Leonhardt, Jad Mouawad and David E. Sanger write in the New York Times: "With fears mounting that high energy costs will crimp economic growth, President Bush called on Americans yesterday to conserve gasoline by driving less. He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation. . . . "Mr. Bush's comments, while similar to remarks he made shortly after the disruption from Hurricane Katrina pushed gasoline prices sharply higher, were particularly notable because the administration has long emphasized new production over conservation. It has also opted not to impose higher mileage standards on automakers. "In 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney said, 'Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it cannot be the basis of a sound energy policy.' Also that year, Ari Fleischer, then Mr. Bush's press secretary, responded to a question about reducing American energy consumption by saying 'that's a big no.' " 'The president believes that it's an American way of life,' Mr. Fleischer said. "Mr. Bush, speaking yesterday after he was briefed at the Energy Department, did not use the dour tone or cardigan-wearing imagery that proved politically deadly for Jimmy Carter during the oil crisis of the 1970's. Nor did Mr. Bush propose new policies to encourage conservation. But he was more explicit than in the past that Americans should cut back." Warren Vieth and Richard Simon write in the Los Angeles Times: "Bush said Monday that everyone had a role to play in responding to the back-to-back storms, which have hampered offshore oil production, refinery operations and fuel distribution in the Gulf Coast region. " 'We can all pitch in . . . by being better conservers of energy,' Bush said after hearing a briefing at the Energy Department. 'I mean, people just need to recognize that the storms have caused disruption and that if they're able to maybe not drive . . . on a trip that's not essential, that would be helpful.' " Nedra Pickler writes for the Associated Press that Bush is on the move today. First stop: A briefing on hurricane damage in the port city of Beaumont, Texas. "After his meeting in Beaumont, Bush was to get an aerial tour of the Texas-Louisiana border area where Rita blew ashore, then meet with Louisiana officials in Lake Charles, La. . . . "The White House also will be looking at ways to conserve, press secretary Scott McClellan said, although that didn't include curtailing the president's travel plans." Pickler notes one flaw in the argument that Bush's travel is essential. "Bush returned Sunday from a three-day trip in which he stopped in four cities that have been a base for government response to the storm. As he has in most of his previous trips to the areas hit by the hurricanes, Bush spent most of the time in meetings with state and local officials--many of them reporting by videoconference. "On Saturday, in a visit to the U.S. Northern Command in Colorado Springs, Colo., some of Bush's briefers were linked from the White House situation room steps from the Oval Office. "Still, McClellan said it is important that the president get a firsthand look at emergency operations and lift the spirits of workers there." What's the Big Deal Anyway? Eric Umansky writes in Slate's Today's Papers: "It's a bit hard to understand why the LAT and NYT think the president's comments are lead-worthy. As the NYT itself reminds, a few days after Katrina, the president said just about the same thing: 'Don't buy gas if you don't need it.' And, rhetoric aside, on neither occasion did the president offer specific proposals for lowering oil consumption.' The Washington Post, incidentally, mentioned Bush's call for conservation deep inside a Justin Blum story on page D3 -- although the story led The Post's Web site for most of the day. One Blogger's View Liberal Washington Monthly blogger Kevin Drum has this analysis of Bush's remarks: "First, he talks about conservation but asks only that people 'pitch in.' He is unwilling to propose any serious government action to reduce oil use. "Second, he talks about environmental restrictions disliked by the energy industry. On this score, unlike the first, he is happy to propose government action. "Third, at the end of a discussion directed solely at oil use, he suggests that nuclear power is part of the answer, seemingly oblivious to the fact that nuclear power is a source of electricity, an industry that uses virtually no oil. Increased use of nuclear power would have no effect on oil consumption at all. "So there you have it. An instinctive aversion to using government power when it's opposed by the [oil] industry, even though conservation measures could have a big impact on oil use; an almost palpable eagerness to use any excuse to strip away environmental rules the energy industry dislikes; and a bland ignorance of basic energy policy that would embarrass a high school student." Not Exactly Clear Bush, who is not known for his strict adherence to grammar when speaking extemporaneously, was unusually unquotable yesterday. Here's a topic Bush knows a lot about: Oil. But his remarks were full of fragment sentences, as well as small-bore statistics and industry lingo. Blogger Holden blisteringly calls attention to some of the harder-to-follow passages. Motorcade Watch Mark Silva of the Chicago Tribune was yesterday's pool reporter, and he faithfully tracked Bush's fuel consumption. "For the day's procession to the Energy Department to assess the nation's energy resources: Two armored limousines, three stretch utility vans, six black SUVs and a partridge-like medical truck. "But no stop-and-go fuel consumption here: A very fast motorcade blew through all traffic lights south and across the Tidal Basin, then east on Independence to the east side entrance of the great cement-walled hall of Energy." Silva noted that Bush had his hand over his heart as he assured the audience: "Gasoline prices obviously are on our mind." Last night, Bush headed to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's home on swanky Kalorama Road for a farewell dinner for Gen. Richard Myers, who is retiring as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "This motorcade was marginally shorter in the SUV category -- five, than the one that traveled to the Energy Department today, with six SUVs. But it was longer in vans, four tonight, compared with three this morning. Two limos, of course," Silva wrote. As for the Military David E. Sanger writes in the New York Times: "President Bush said Monday that he and Congress should immediately begin discussing whether to amend federal law so the military could take responsibility right away in natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina. "While Mr. Bush had raised the idea before, his comments, at an appearance at the Energy Department, were his first explicit remarks about changing the 127-year-old law that restricts the role of federal troops when they act on American soil. . . . "Many Pentagon officials have expressed concern about broadening the military's responsibilities to include what would, in effect, be police work, along with its combat role. They argue that it would require very different training, equipment and force levels. . . . "At a news briefing later, Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, said the administration was looking at 'automatic triggers' that could start that federal response. "It was not clear how those triggers would work, or if the president would have to sign off on the mobilization, as he does when National Guard troops are federalized." Here is the text of McClellan's briefing. Cindy Sheehan Watch Jennifer C. Kerr writes for the Associated Press: "Cindy Sheehan, the California mother who became a leader of the anti-war movement after her son died in Iraq, was arrested Monday along with hundreds of others protesting outside the White House. "Sheehan, carrying a photo of her son in his Army uniform, rallied with other protesters in a park across the street from the White House and then marched to the gate of the executive mansion to request a meeting with President Bush. "The protesters later sat down on the pedestrian walkway in front of the White House-- knowing they would be arrested--and began singing and chanting 'Stop the war now!'" Petula Dvorak writes in The Washington Post that about 370 antiwar demonstrators in all were arrested. Sheehan herself writes on Huffingtonpost.com: "We all know by now why George won't meet with parents of the soldiers he has killed who disagree with him. First of all, he hates it when people disagree with him. I am not so sure he hates it as much as he is in denial that it even happens. Secondly, he is a coward who arrogantly refuses to meet with the people who pay his salary. Maybe the next time one of us is asked by our bosses to have a performance review, or we are going to be written up for a workplace infraction, we should refuse to go and talk to our bosses citing the fact that the President doesn't have to. The third reason why he won't talk to us is that he knows there is no Noble Cause for the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq. It is a question that has no true answer." Good Question White House Briefing readers have lots of good questions. Here's one from George Sievers: "You quote in [Monday's] column : 'In view of the growing costs of Gulf Coast hurricanes, White House Budget Director Joshua Bolten said the president has asked him "to examine the rest of the budget . . . to see where we can tighten our belt," a quest that may lead to cuts in federal benefit programs.' "The allusion is that cuts in such programs as Medicare and Medicade may result. When it was suggested that taxes be raised to help pay for hurricane relief, President Bush claimed it would 'harm economic growth.' "Will some reporter ask President Bush why raising taxes (or not making the tax cuts permanent) on those already well off, harms economic growth; but why do cuts to benefit programs for the less fortunate, not harm the economy?" Supreme Court Watch Tom Brune writes in Newsday: "With the Senate debate under way on the confirmation of John G. Roberts as chief justice, President George W. Bush must now weigh how big a battle he is willing to fight over his nominee to fill a second vacancy on the Supreme Court. "Bush is expected to announce his choice to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate whose successor could push the court to the right, soon after the Senate votes to confirm Roberts on tomorrow or Thursday. . . . "As his post-hurricane popularity remains depressed, some experts suggest he might want to avoid a fight over the court, while others say a fight could bolster his base. "In response to a question yesterday about his search, Bush said he had interviewed 'people from all walks of life' and that 'diversity is one of the strengths of our country.' " Halliburton Watch Dana Milbank writes in The Washington Post that the feeding frenzy over Bush's spending proposals begins: "Would-be government contractors were meeting in the Hart Senate Office Building to figure out how to get a share of the money. A 'Katrina Reconstruction Summit,' hosted by Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and sponsored by Halliburton, among others, brought some 200 lobbyists, corporate representatives and government staffers to a room overlooking the Capitol for a five-hour conference that included time for a 'networking break' and advice on 'opportunities for private sector involvement.' " Karl Rove Watch The Dallas Morning News reports: "White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove is slated as the special guest at an Oct. 5 fundraiser for the Dallas County Republican Party. "The event will be at the Hyatt Regency in downtown Dallas, with top donors asked to give $1,500. "Give up the cash and you'll get your photo taken with the man credited as the architect of President Bush's successful campaigns for the White House." Extreme Public Relations Faye Fiore writes in the Los Angeles Times: "Facing criticism that he appeared disengaged from the disaster wrought by Hurricane Katrina, President Bush has been looking for opportunities to show his concern. But the White House will take the effort a step further today, venturing into untested waters by putting the nation's first lady on reality television. "Laura Bush will travel to storm-damaged Biloxi, Miss., to film a spot on the feel-good, wish-granting hit 'Extreme Makeover: Home Edition.' Mrs. Bush sought to be on the program because she shares the 'same principles' that the producers hold, her press secretary said." In this episode, a convoy of trucks stocked with everything from mattresses to pants will arrive at a shelter. "It's not clear exactly what Mrs. Bush will do -- reality shows are unscripted, after all -- but Tom Forman, executive producer and creator, said he is hoping that she'll just pitch in and help unload. " 'I think we say, 'Mrs. Bush, the stuff is over here, the people are over there, could you grab the other end of that mattress?' Forman said. Press secretary Susan Whitson envisioned something closer to her handing out clothing and thanking volunteers." Fiore writes that it was the White House that contacted the show -- not the other way around. -------- ENERGY From energy to medicine, UN forum discusses innovative uses of nuclear physics 27 September 2005 UN News Centre http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=15996&Cr=IAEA&Cr1= From meeting burgeoning energy needs through innovative technologies to boosting cancer treatment in developing countries, nuclear physics and the United Nations atomic energy agency have a key role to play on the road to sustainable development, an international scientific forum was told today. “Even the most conservative estimates predict at least a doubling of energy usage by mid-century,” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei told the opening session of 8th Scientific Forum being held in Vienna within the framework of the IAEA’s annual General Conference. “Coupled with concerns related to the risk of climate change and the security of energy supply, this anticipated growth is creating a sense of rising expectations for nuclear power,” he said, stressing the need for innovation ranging from advanced fuel cycles using fissile and fertile materials more efficiently to contributing to “energy currencies” other than electricity, such as hydrogen, desalination and heating. Noting that lack of energy restricts every aspect of development in developing countries, from increasing food production to improving health care, he again cited the role of innovation, such as regional collaboration to address the issues of upfront capital costs, infrastructure, workforce needs and electrical grid capacity. Turning to nuclear technology for health care, Mr. ElBaradei noted that fully two-thirds of global radiotherapy equipment, offering curative or palliative benefits for over 50 per cent of cancer patients, serve the 1 billion people living in industrialized countries, while the remaining one third is stretched among the world’s remaining 5.5 billion. “The Agency´s Programme of Action for Cancer Radiotherapy (PACT) is designed to increase our capacity to assist developing Member States, by mobilizing more resources to address personnel, infrastructure, technology and training needs,” he said. Stressing that nuclear power must be both “economically viable and unequivocally safe” for nuclear power to have a future, he called for a focused commitment to ensure that lessons learned in one country are effectively and thoroughly communicated to all countries. “The Scientific Forum is an opportunity to share new ideas, to learn from each other and to forge new collaboration,” he concluded. -------- alternative energy Scientists Conduct Wind Energy Projects September 27, 2005 — By Associated Press http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=8894 ATLANTA — In an effort to make the country less dependent on foreign oil, experimental wind energy projects are underway at opposite ends of Georgia. Although scientists have been exploring wind power for decades, wind energy technology still is in its infancy a quarter-century after the energy crisis of the 1970s, said Bill Bulpitt, senior research engineer for Georgia Tech's Strategic Energy Initiative. "There was a sense of urgency at that time," he said. "Sadly, 25 years later, we haven't turned the corner ... This country just has not done a very good job of taking care of its energy problem." In northwestern Georgia, an alliance of the state's electric cooperatives has erected a tower on top of Rocky Mountain near Rome, Ga., to measure wind speeds and directions. The project will be conducted over the course of a year to determine whether the site is suitable for producing wind-generated power. The North Georgia mountains are the only areas of the state where wind generation will work, said Michael Whiteside, president of Green Power EMC, which runs the renewable-energy program for 17 Georgia electric cooperatives. But initial results from the first two months of the study are showing the area has slow wind speeds of 6 to 10 mph. "You need higher speeds to put in large turbines," Whiteside said. But off the coast of Savannah, Ga., the Atlanta-based Southern Co. is working with researchers from the Georgia Institute of Technology on a similar study to determine the feasibility of offshore wind turbines. There, the research platforms are showing much faster wind speeds -- 16 mph -- than in the north Georgia mountains, he said. One advantage of developing wind-generated power in southeast Georgia is that it's close to population centers. Location is one problem with existing wind-energy producers, such as turbines located in the plains of west Texas. Once electricity is produced there, it's expensive to get the energy to customers, Bulpitt said. Information from: The Rockdale Citizen, http://www.citizenonline.net/ -------- ACTIVISTS Anti-war activist Sheehan arrested at protest Updated 9/27/2005 10:52 AM (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-09-26-sheehanarrested_x.htm WASHINGTON — Cindy Sheehan, the California woman who has used her son's death in Iraq to spur the anti-war movement, was arrested Monday while protesting outside the White House. Sheehan and several dozen other protesters sat down on the sidewalk after marching along the pedestrian walkway on Pennsylvania Avenue. Police warned them three times that they were breaking the law by failing to move along, then began making arrests. (Video: Police book 'Peace Mom') Sheehan, 48, was the first taken into custody. She was taken to a police vehicle while protesters chanted, "The whole world is watching." Others who were arrested also cooperated with police. Sgt. Scott Fear, spokesman for the U.S. Park Police, said they would be charged with demonstrating without a permit, which is a misdemeanor. Park Police Sgt. L.J. McNally said Sheehan and the others would be taken to a processing center where they would be fingerprinted and photographed, then given a ticket and released. The process would take several hours, he said. Sheehan's 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in an ambush in Sadr City, Iraq, last year. She attracted worldwide attention last month with her 26-day vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch. Sheehan was among several hundred demonstrators who marched around the White House on Monday and then stopped in front and began singing and chanting "Stop the war now!" The demonstration is part of a broader anti-war effort on Capitol Hill organized by United for Peace and Justice, an umbrella group. Representatives from anti-war groups were meeting Monday with members of Congress to urge them to work to end the war and bring home the troops. The protest following a massive demonstration Saturday on the National Mall that drew a crowd of 100,000 or more, the largest such gathering in the capital since the war began in March 2003. On Sunday, a rally supporting the war drew roughly 500 participants. Speakers included veterans of World War II and the war in Iraq, as well as family members of soldiers killed in Iraq. "I would like to say to Cindy Sheehan and her supporters don't be a group of unthinking lemmings. It's not pretty," said Mitzy Kenny of Ridgeley, W.Va., whose husband died in Iraq last year. The anti-war demonstrations "can affect the war in a really negative way. It gives the enemy hope." ---- White House Sidewalk Protest Leads to Arrest of About 370 By Petula Dvorak Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, September 27, 2005; B01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/26/AR2005092600143_pf.html About 370 antiwar demonstrators were arrested yesterday after planting themselves on the sidewalk in front of the White House, a protest that stretched out for nearly five hours as police removed them in stages to avoid a backlog at a processing center. The demonstrators, who had stayed in Washington after Saturday's antiwar rally and march past the White House, were carted away in Metro buses and police vans. Fingerprinting and booking continued late into the evening at a U.S. Park Police operations facility in Anacostia. Those arrested were charged with demonstrating without a permit, a misdemeanor that carries a $50 fine and -- like a traffic ticket -- can be paid by mail or challenged later in court, said Sgt. Scott Fear, a Park Police spokesman. In an action that they had planned several weeks ago and discussed with police, the demonstrators went to the White House gate on Pennsylvania Avenue NW about 12:30 p.m. and tried to deliver to President Bush the names of all the soldiers and civilians killed in Iraq. When the president did not meet with them, they sat down for their protest. With bullhorns and hoarse voices, they yelled at the executive mansion, asking whether the president was peeking from behind a curtain or hearing them at all. "You are a coward! You didn't meet us in Crawford; come meet us now," said Beatriz Saldivar of Fort Worth, whose nephew, Army Sgt. Daniel Torres, was killed in action nearly eight months ago during his second tour in Iraq. In August, Saldivar had joined antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan during a protest outside the president's Texas ranch, when Sheehan had asked to talk with Bush about the death of her son, Casey Sheehan, in Iraq. Cindy Sheehan, who was among the demonstrators yesterday, was the first to be taken into police custody. She smiled at the crowd when police lifted her from the sidewalk and escorted her to a van. At his daily news briefing yesterday, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush is "very much aware" of the past few days of protests and "recognizes that there are differences of opinion" on the Iraq war. "It's the right of the American people to peacefully express their views. And that's what you're seeing here in Washington, D.C.," McClellan said. "They're well-intentioned, but the president strongly believes that withdrawing . . . would make us less safe and make the world more dangerous." The group arrested yesterday was led by a coalition of religious leaders. They were joined by anarchists, military families, Iraq war veterans and political activists of various stripes. "Only people can stop the war," said Laura Linder, 44, of Chicago. She was wearing a red, white and blue bandanna and a Plexiglas hockey mask, and her hands were trembling. She said that the weekend's protests were the first she had attended and that she had never been arrested. "I'm afraid of getting my face bashed in." But the relationship between police and protesters was placid, even jovial at times. The crowd had headed for the White House with signs, chants and guitars. Four monks kept time with drums and a gong. Half a dozen women pulled off their shirts, standing topless with signs that read, "Breasts, Not Bombs!" In front of the White House, however, the chants and songs grew quieter as the remaining protesters wilted in the humid afternoon. Earlier in the day, 41 protesters were arrested about 6:30 a.m. at two entrances to the Pentagon and charged with disorderly conduct, said Maj. Todd Vician, a Defense Department spokesman. They were all released and given court dates, Vician said. Frida Berrigan, 31, of Brooklyn, N.Y., who organized the protest, said the demonstrators unfurled signs that read "War is Terrorism" and blocked workers' access to the building. ---- Protesters & Police, Adhering to an Arresting Script By David Montgomery Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, September 27, 2005; C03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/26/AR2005092601575_pf.html It was a model of the modern style of civil disobedience: about 370 antiwar protesters, including Cindy Sheehan, arrested at the White House peacefully -- and on schedule. Thus concluded three days of demonstrations against the Iraq war. Yesterday's finale played out under agreed-upon and paradoxical rules of engagement: permitted, but not entirely allowed; defiant of authority, yet enabled by the police; emotional, yet routine. Another choreographed ritual of civic life, like the changing of the guard at the Tomb of the Unknowns. Protesters and police played their roles perfectly, as if according to a script. The screenplay would go like this: Getting Arrested at the White House: One (Nonviolent) Act in Three Scenes Scene 1: At 10 a.m. the sanctuary of Foundry United Methodist Church, nine blocks north of the White House, is filled with hundreds of protesters. They wear labels with names of dead American troops and Iraqi civilians. Organizers Gordon Clark with the Iraq Pledge of Resistance and Steve Cleghorn with Military Families Speak Out announce final logistics. Steve Cleghorn: Yesterday we ran out of sheets that have maps of the route around the White House. Today we have more if you need one. On the back is a map of the Park Service detention facility, and how to get out of there by walking to Metro. Gordon Clark: Is there anyone who has not had nonviolence training? Upstairs, veteran activist Nadine Bloch of Takoma Park has the group role-play interactions with police. Nadine Bloch: Sitting down is a technique you may want to use. Sit down. I want people to experience the dynamic. Protesters, how do you feel? Grounded, intentional, powerful. This is a beautiful place to be. Scene 2: The group begins marching to the Ellipse, led by clergy and protest notables including Princeton professor Cornel West and Leslie Cagan, organizer with United for Peace and Justice. Cornel West: We are going to bear witness today. Leslie Cagan : We're not going away and we're going to use every tool available to us. Clark: If people have to put their bodies on the line to risk their security, their money, their freedom, that's what we're going to do. D.C. police block traffic for the singing, chanting procession. The organizers have permits to march and gather on the Ellipse and in Lafayette Square. They have sent letters to the White House seeking a meeting with President Bush; if he declines, they will risk arrest by stepping into an unpermitted area. Clark: We sent the letters by Federal Express because the last time, at the trial, we were asked, 'Well, did you send the letters by Fed-Ex? How do you know the White House got the letters?' . . . We talked with the Park Service, the Park Police, the Metropolitan Police Department. As part of our nonviolent witness, we're not trying to keep this a secret. If they will work with us to help us do what we want to do, we're happy to work with them. Sgt. S.L. Booker [special events coordinator with the U.S. Park Police]: You don't have a permit to march on Constitution Avenue. Clark : You mean they gave us permission to march in your jurisdiction and they shouldn't have? Booker [nodding yes]: I'm here to work with you. [He stops traffic on Constitution so the protesters can march, even without a permit]. At the Ellipse, Cleghorn centers a blue milk crate for a podium in view of the south facade of the White House, for good camera angles. But where are the media? Sunny Schnitzer [a member of the Bethesda Jewish Congregation]: I'd like to have somebody notice all these people here. . . . The fact that 300 to 400 people get arrested will not be a footnote in history, a spit in the ocean, unless hundreds of thousands of people know it happened. Clark [With bullhorn]: From the Boston Tea Party to the abolition of slavery to the suffrage and the right of women to vote, to the civil rights movement, to the movement to stop the Vietnam War -- all of those movements had civil and nonviolent resistance at their vanguards to stop and face that injustice. You are part of that history here today, everyone. With whoops and cheers, the group marches to the climactic Scene 3: The sidewalk of Pennsylvania Avenue close to the White House. Surprise! Cindy Sheehan is here, too. Now the television cameras are out in force. The cameras press the clergy leaders and Sheehan against the White House gate, where they are seeking to meet with Bush. West : Media, back up. This is crazy! Cindy Sheehan [turning away from the gate, rebuffed again]: He won't meet with us! Somehow, they expected as much. The group walks to a spot directly in front of the White House -- where demonstrations are illegal. Also not allowed: affixing nametags of the dead to the fence, which the group does. Four men wearing Guantanamo-style orange jumpsuits and black hoods step up on the base of the fence. SWAT commander: All the media, go to your area. We're getting ready to go with our announcements. [Reading from a sheet of paper, using a bullhorn to give the first of three warnings to the protesters.] All those who remain on the closed portion of the White House sidewalk will be arrested. After two more warnings, enter, stage left: More black-clad SWAT officers with white plastic handcuffs. Sheehan is the first to be cuffed. She goes limp, and they hoist her up. She smiles briefly. Then she walks the rest of the way to the police van. Sgt. Scott Fear [ Park Police spokesman]: A lot of times they try to get the leader first. Exit, stage right: The first van full of arrestees, charged with demonstrating without a permit. Consequences: $50 fine or stand trial. Clark: I'm thrilled that this many people are willing to take the next step of nonviolent resistance and have this level of determination and seriousness about opposing the war. Code Pink [the women's protest group, a dozen members of which chant]: Rita, Katrina, we need another lead-ah. War in Iraq, we want our country back! Then they sing "America the Beautiful" as the handcuffing drags on for 4 1/2 hours and the audience drifts away. ---- Opinion: Global Warming; Anti-War Protests Eugene Robinson Washington Post Columnist Tuesday, September 27, 2005; 1:30 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/09/26/DI2005092601065_pf.html Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson was online Tuesday, Sept. 27, at 1:30 p.m. ET to discuss his recent columns on hurricanes and global warming ( Two-for-One Deals ) and the weekend's anti-war protests in Washington, D.C.( Stop, Children, What's That Sound? ) The transcript follows. ____________________ Eugene Robinson: Hi, folks. I'll be here chatting for the next hour or so, about recent columns -- antiwar protests, global warming, New Orleans and the Gulf -- or anything else you'd like to bring up. (I've spent part of the morning watching former FEMA director Michael Brown try to explain himself at a congressional hearing, and "Brownie" is sure doing a "heckuva job" putting the blame on everybody else.) _______________________ Canton, N.Y.: With hundreds of thousands of anti-war protesters demonstrating around the country, why has the media barely covered the story? Eugene Robinson: Well, I don't want to sound like a "homer," but The Post did run its story about the protest at the top of the front page, with big photos and more stories inside. I noticed that some other papers, including one big one in New York, ran the protest inside. I think that was a mistake. _______________________ Laurel, Md.: I'm curious about the coverage of the Anti-War rally in The Post. In D.C. there were anywhere from 100-150,000 anti-war demonstrators on Saturday and maybe a few hundred pro-war, pro-Bush demonstrators on Saturday and Sunday. Why is it The Post and other media outlets insist on giving equal coverage to both sides on everything? Do 400 Pro-Bush demonstrators equal 100,000 anti-war demonstrators in the minds of the media? Eugene Robinson: That's an interesting question, even if the premise is a bit shaky. The Post ran the big protest on the front page and the subsequent little protest on the Metro page. I think you could still argue that this was too much for a few hundred protesters, but the truth is that the coverage wasn't equal. _______________________ Cabin John, Md.: It looks like even a large protest of 100k+ gets little or no coverage in the news unless the protesters are burning cars or wrecking a Starbucks. Can we safely say that these sorts of non-violent demonstrations are no longer effective in grabbing public attention or changing public opinion? Eugene Robinson: No, I think that mass, non-violent protest is still effective. Anyone who plans any event has to submit to the vagaries of the weather (and the news cycle), and even though this protest got pretty heavy coverage, it would have been heavier if another hurricane hadn't come along. _______________________ Centreville, Va.: The fact that you attach such huge importance to the protests helps to clarify why folks on the left are always so mystified when conservatives do well in elections. We'll be generous and say that there were actually 300,000 protestors present, although organizers always vastly inflate their numbers. That means for every 1,000 people in the United States, one showed up to protest. As far as I'm concerned, that makes the whole silly spectacle utterly insignificant. And don't be fooled by the much lower attendance of the pro-war rally; people who support the President's stance are doing such mundane things as working. Oh, and by the way, Jesse Jackson's presence may make the protest "official" for the activist classes, but for the rest of us it only shows what a sham the whole event is, since Jackson will show up at anything to get his face on TV. Eugene Robinson: I think that kind of ignores the traditional role that protest has played in this and other societies. When you get up into six figures, in my view, you've made a point.... _______________________ Centreville, Va.: I have a memo to the baby boomers out there: just because you see the world a certain way doesn't the mean the rest of us do. Ergo, all wars are not Vietnam. And seeing Joan Baez protesting a war might feel like old home week at the love-in to you, but the rest of us either don't know who she is or don't care, or both. It's nice that you get to feel good about how you think you stopped a war, but please, can we look to the future just a little here? Eugene Robinson: I interrupt the disaster/global warming string to say: C'mon, don't bum us out. We boomers are approaching our dotage, and it's nice to revisit our youth. Besides, there are still an awful lot of us. Seriously, sometimes the future does look a little like the past. It did on Saturday....