Environmental Defense Institute
News on Environmental Health and Safety Issues
|
February 2005
|
Volume
16 Number 1
|
DOE Launches New Plutonium Production in Idaho
The Bush Administration and
the Republican- controlled Congress are ramping-up their “Space Nuclear”
programs to the point that they now intend to restart Department of Energy
(DOE) plutonium production to meet projected needs.
This is a frightening prospect for
anyone who has tracked DOE’s disastrous history of nuclear materials
production, testing, and tragic (arguably illegal by the Resource Conservation
Recovery Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act)
mismanagement of nuclear facility radioactive emissions and waste
deposition.
Violation of international treaties
(signed by the US), including the Non-proliferation Treaty and the Outer Space
Treaty of 1967, are documented.
The uncompensated human costs
already carried by residents living in the shadow of DOE operations is horrific
and thrusting this new hazard and formidable long-term risk on future
generations is categorically
unconscionable.
The DOE claims it has exhausted the
previous Russian source for plutonium-238 and now has committed startup funding
of $230 million for a “domestic” Idaho plutonium production operation. However, the Environmental Defense Institute
(EDI) has recently uncovered (not publicly available) documents that say only a
fraction of contracted and delivered Russian plutonium is acknowledged. This new “domestic” Idaho plutonium
production program funding could exceed $700 million.
DOE
claims it needs a “reliable” source of Pu-238 for use in NASA’s space program
power generators and other undisclosed secret military programs.
DOE is now belatedly “scoping” for
public comment a new Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for plutonium
production at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). [1] The plan is to build a new neptunium-237
“target” fabrication and processing operation that provides the raw material
that eventually leads to the Pu-238 product.
This would include the use of the existing INL Advanced Test Reactor
(ATR), and build a new reactor at INL to irradiate neptunium targets and then
process the targets using a multi-stage solvent extraction process for Pu-238. [2] The PEIS at E-1 also describes the “New
Research Reactor Operations” that would supplement and/or replace the ATR built
in the 1960s and cannot pass any current NRC structural/containment standards.
This new reactor “...was developed to meet USDOE’s missions of (1) producing
medical and industrial radioisotopes, (2) producing plutonium-238 (minimum net
annual production fo 5 kilograms [11 pounds]), and supporting nuclear energy
research and development.”
DOE’s “New Research Reactor”
will replace the aging ATR built in the
1960s that cannot pass any current Nuclear Regulatory Commission structural,
radiation containment, or seismic standards. This new reactor “was developed to meet DOE’s missions of (1)
producing medical and industrial radioisotopes, (2) producing plutonium-238 (5
kilograms [11 pounds] per year), and (3) supporting nuclear energy research and
development.”
This is DOE’s backdoor move to
launch the next generation of nuclear power reactor design when the private
commercial sector is refusing since the Three-Mile Island meltdown in the
1970's.
At issue, DOE’s new plan to
consolidate Pu-238 production for radioisotope power system (RPS) production at
a single DOE nuclear site in
Idaho. The INL is being sited by the U.S. Government to consolidate the
production, purification and encapsulation of Pu-238. [3] The point being this multi-stage target
solvent processing in the production of Pu-238 generates significant quantities
of air emissions and liquid waste that then must be treated, resulting in
additional toxic air emissions.
Historically, the various phases of this cycle have been accomplished at
several different DOE sites that documents show extensive contaminate releases
occurred..[4]
These Pu-238 projects have been used
primarily to power military surveillance satellites, and NASA missions into
deep space utilizing the sustained heat source generated from Plutonium-238
produced in nuclear reactors. In
addition to creating this power source or, “space batteries” as they have been
called, the DOE is saying that the plutonium-238 will be used for other
undisclosed “national security” initiatives.
Enormous accident risks to
public health and safety are being gambled by the government without full
disclosure. About 26 individual US
space launches to date have had plutonium on board. The 1997 Cassini Mission, for instance had 72.3 pounds (159
kilograms) of Pu-238 onboard.
Dr. Ernest Sternglass, professor
emeritus of radiological physics at the University of Pittsburgh, warns that if
Cassini disintegrated, it would present a great danger and “that the death toll
from plutonium exposure of a Cassini inadvertent reentry may be as high as
30-40 million people. The international Committee on Radiological Protection
states “that inhalation of 1/10,000 of a gram of Pu causes lung cancer.”[5]
Dr. Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear
engineer from the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research stated “the
total radiation fallout from all the open air nuclear explosions from 1945 to
the present is 440,000 curies. Now, if
Cassini had an inadvertent reentry with the 3 RPS’s and the 130 RHU’s vaporized
in our atmosphere, approximately 406,000 curies of radiation would be
released.” There have been more than 900 open air nuclear explosions caused the
premature death since 1950 of some 20 million.
A single accident of Cassini could possibly emit nearly as much
radiation than all of these 900 put together. [6]
Admittedly, the Cassini Mission had
no apparent accidents, but both the DOE and NASA have an aggressive program
within the next decade for dozens of new launches that will pose comparable or
larger risks to the public especially when as planned they have plutonium
propelled nuclear rockets. With a NASA
mission (with plutonium component) failure rate of 12%, this is a major issue. [7]
•The types and numbers of
facilities,
•Where the facilities will be
placed,
•The use of the facilities,
•The environmental impacts of
each of the facilities,
•Possible alternative locations
instead of at INEEL for the facilities,
•The alternative non-nuclear
solar power advanced by the European Space Agency;
•The advanced fuels under
consideration including non-nuclear alternatives,
•The storage of nuclear wastes,
•The disposal of nuclear wastes,
•The transport of the nuclear
wastes to a repository;
•Processing the nuclear wastes,
•Security issues,
•Militarization of space;
•Accidents;
•Complete emissions and waste
characterization related to all stages of the Pu-238 production process;
•Statutory and regulatory
permits required under RCRA, Clean Air Act, and Clean Water Act;
•Funding requirements for all
programs that fully account for transfers from the DOE’s Environmental
Management Account over to the Nuclear Energy Account. [8] H
|
Nuclear Rockets Undergoing
Testing
|
The Bush
administration and the neo-conservative controlled Congress continue to push
for the restart of the next generation on nuclear weapons testing in Nevada,
and the ongoing development of nuclear rocket testing under the auspicious of
NASA’s Glenn Research Center (Cleveland, OH), and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
at Pasadena, CA).
The older
nuclear rocket reactor based designs
“Timberwind” type, or high flying nuke plane - would use either
Uranium-235 or Plutonium-239 in the same way and in similar amounts to those
used in Naval reactors. They simply are basically un-shielded reactors, where
the reactor is made critical and the propellent (usually hydrogen) is then
pumped through the very hot reactor, the reactor heats the hydrogen to very
high levels turning it into hydrogen plasma which then provides the thrust.
The new ion
drive type units, or nuclear electric, currently being tested in Ohio and
California uses the same source of power generation to create the electric
power to generate a steady stream of ions, or to make very small continual
amounts of high temperature plasma of some kind to use as thrust. They are not
meant to be extremely powerful short bursts of thrust like conventional rocket
engines, but to be able to produce a steady low level of thrust that over time
steadily speeds up the payload over months or years of running a low out put,
with the end being that the payload - space craft - eventually reaches speeds
far higher than we can do with conventional rocket engines and thus gets a
probe to the outer reaches of the solar system in shorter times.
Here the power
source can be a range of nuclear sources from Pu-238 at lower power
requirements end where a lot of electric generation is not required, to new
generation of fission reactors using U235 and/or Pu239 where major amounts of
power would be required -- large craft.
The Russians still
have enough Pu-238 for sale to handle NASA's needs, BUT, DOE is fixated on "national security needs" and
hence want to produce our own. Read carefully the small print on this not being
dependent on the Russians as it is another clue to the extent of military
requirements planned for Pu 238 usage. H
|
Downwinder
letter to
Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden
|
November
22, 2004
Dear Attorney General Wasden,
The atomic
fallout that repeatedly was aimed at Idaho by the federal government had
profound health impacts it created in many Idaho families. We are asking for
your help.
Fifty-four
years after the first atomic weapons fallout hit Idaho we are finally
"hearing" about RECA compensation of $50,000 for victims from the
government. We would like your legal opinion because even the $50,000 seems
like a grossly inappropriate settlement for the total intentional damage done.
In a car
"accident" the victim receives settlement for all his medical bills
and time missed at work. The atomic fallout was no accident, it was
intentionally aimed at Idaho by waiting for wind patterns to blow our way. The
tobacco industry paid a high price for intentionally hiding their knowledge of
their poison. While a smoker still has to realize some obvious danger from
smoking, Idaho never knew what hit us.
Please consider
that many of these survivors have ongoing medical problems and bills that
$50,000 doesn't cover. We need first class medical treatment and we need it
now. There are people going without treatment for lack of money.
The health
effects appear way beyond the tiny list of compensatable cancers under RECA.
Many suffer from hypothyroidism instead of thyroid cancer from the high I-131
exposure. Our state Medicaid paid over $900,000 last year for thyroid
supplement.
Radiation
affects the immune system. Our autoimmune rate for Multiple Sclerosis has a
statewide rate higher than what the CDC says is America's highest rate of MS,
for 19 people in a county in Ohio. Smack in the center of the footprint of
Nevada Test Site sits Shoshone with world record rates of MS. With these high
rates of an immune disorder in Idaho, why is the burden of proof not on the
government to prove they did not cause this problem by aiming weapons fallout
at us repeatedly? Many more show symptoms but cannot afford to see a doctor.
In order to
preserve choice in our medical care, and given the present wide spread
geography of those who lived in the fallout zone, we would consider it fair to
receive vouchers that our doctors can receive payment for from the government
for all the medical bills of victims.
We suggest that
the government and corporations must pay for the medications like thyroid
supplement and drugs we need for treatment and pain.
Now we can talk
about the settlement for pain and suffering. While individuals often receive
millions, we realize that the large numbers of us would prohibit that. The
present RECA payment to miners is $150,000. While workers assume some obvious
risk with that job, we were innocent bystanders hundreds of miles away. So
$250,000 appears appropriate.
While the
medical vouchers are needed without a doubt, we would consider negotiating on
the payment for pain and suffering if the medical care is resolved and an
apology is finally given.
We realize that
other states have tried to stop the onslaught of nuclear fallout and seek compensation
before. They succeeded all the way to the Supreme Court, but got overturned by
the "sovereign immunity" of the federal government. Does this mean
that the federal government can intentionally inflict diseases, cancer, and
death on its citizens? Can they do it again?
The underground
atomic testing had some horrible accidents that added to Idahoans body burden
of radiation we have gotten from Nevada Test Site explosions since 1950. That
atomic testing was only stopped in 1992. With the issue of a renewed nuclear
arms race and more deadly testing there must be a legal way to protect our
state's right to life. Let us not forget that the fetus is the most vulnerable
to the deadly effects of radioactive fallout coating Idaho again.
Since previous
cases have made it to the Supreme Court, let us not forget that we have
appointed more constitutionally based judges and often the constitution is
interpreted differently.
If this
"sovereign immunity" truly means that more nuclear fallout can be
aimed at Idaho, what law or constitutional amendment can you write for our
delegation to present to Congress that can protect a state from being aimed at
with deadly nuclear fallout by our federal government? Please share your thoughts and consider
action for Idaho.
Sincerely,
Citizens of Idaho: Eltona (Tona) Henderson, Fred Trenkle
(Representing over 150 Magic Valley victims of MS within 15 miles of Shoshone),
State Representative Wendy Jaquet, Jeannie Burkhart , David Vahlberg, Gary
Riggs, Janet Tomita, Barbara Moyle, Cindy Kawano, Earl and Susie Nelson, Howard
E. Wright, Darlene Cheney, Deana (Barzee) Collamer, Preston J Truman, Dr. Peter
Rickards D.P.M. H
|
Hanford Downwinder Case
Slated for Trial
|
The Associated Press reports
(11/7/04) “A federal judge has ruled
that plutonium-making at Hanford in the mid-1940s was an ‘abnormally dangerous’
activity that put thousands of people in eastern Washington State and northern
Idaho at risk.
“That means people who live downwind
of Hanford and allege harm from Hanford’s radiation emissions won’t have to
prove government contractors DuPont de Nemours Inc. and General Electric Co.
acted recklessly when they chemically separated uranium to make plutonium for
nuclear bombs.
“The only issue will be whether the
releases of radioactive iodine-131 actually harmed people, said Louise Roselle
of Cincinnati, lead attorney for the downwinders.
“U.S. District Judge William F.
Nielsen wrote in his order November 3rd 2004 that emissions of I-131
could result in ‘serious illness with serious consequences’ - thyroid problems,
in particular.
“State law imposes strict liability
for abnormally dangerous or ultra-hazardous activities, the judge wrote. ‘If
the activity is abnormally dangerous, then the defendants may be held strictly
liable for plaintiffs’ damages, regardless of whether defendants exercised the
utmost care in the conduct of their activities at Hanford,’ the order says.
“The contractors disagree. ‘We
believe this decision is fundamentally wrong and merits appeal,’ said Kevin Van
Wart of Chicago, lead attorney for the Hanford contractors. ‘We still have
years of litigation ahead of us.’
“Nielsen is preparing for a March
2005 trial involving eleven ‘bellwether’ cases to determine an out-come for
thousands of others who sued.
“The lawsuits were filed beginning
in 1991, after a government study said the Hanford releases were large enough
to increase health risks for people living downwind of the plant in
south-central Washington. ‘The innocent people who can prove they suffered harm
should be compensated by the entire nation who benefitted from the activity,’
Nielsen’s order says.
“Scientists working for the World
War II Manhattan Project, the top-secret U.S. mission to develop an atomic
bomb, knew by 1943 that iodine-131 could damage or destroy the human thyroid
gland, Nielsen wrote. They also knew
the gland could be protected with potassium iodine pills, which block the
uptake of the radioactive iodine.
“Scientists also knew as early as
1925 that iodine in cows’ diets was transferred to their milk - the main
exposure pathway for people living near Hanford, Nielsen wrote. No pills were ever offered to people living
near Hanford.
“In the 1970s, Herbert Cahn, the
former Benton-Franklin County health officer, suggested distributing the pills
to protect people against a Hanford accident. His supervisors told him to drop
the idea or be fired, Chan said in an interview with the Spokesman Review
newspaper.
“Last year, the American Academy of
Pediatrics recommended the pills be kept at day-care centers, schools and homes
to protect the thyroid glands of children living near nuclear power
plants. Tri-City, Washington officials
declined to act, saying decisions to stockpile the pills should be left to
families.” [Lewiston Morning Tribune (11/7/04)] H
|
Congress
Uncertain on Bush Requests for Funding for Nuclear Weapons
|
Michael Kllian reports in the
Chicago Tribune (11/23/04) “The defeat of President Bush's attempts to fund research
and possibly development of a new family of nuclear weapons was hailed by arms
control advocates as their biggest success in more than a decade. They were
reacting to the approval by the Senate and House of a spending bill that
eliminates funding for the nuclear ‘bunker buster’ as well as other ‘advanced
concept’ tactical nuclear weapons.
" ‘This is the biggest victory
that arms control advocates in Congress have had since 1992, when we were able
to place limits on nuclear testing,’ said Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the
leading opponents of the Bush administration's nuclear arms program. ‘If we are
to convince other countries to forgo nuclear weapons, we cannot be preparing to
build an entire new generation of nuclear weapons here in the U.S.’
The administration had argued that
it was important at least to study such weapons at a time of great threat
against the United States. But congressional sources said Republicans joined
with Democrats in opposing the program because of the example it would set
while the U.S. is trying to compel North Korea and Iran to abandon their
nuclear arms efforts.
“The White House had outlined plans
to spend more than $500 million on the penetrator project over the next several
years, which some analysts said was enough to move the weapon into production.
Bush also had asked for $9 million for further research into the possible
development of "advanced concept" low-yield tactical nuclear weapons
that could be used on a battlefield.
“In addition to eliminating the
funding requests, Congress slashed to $7 million from $29.8 million a White
House request to build new nuclear warhead facilities, or "pits," and
cut $30 million that the administration had planned to use to speed resumption
of nuclear testing, if that proved necessary.
“Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
called the decision ‘a consequential victory for those of us who believe the
United States sends a wrong signal to the rest of the world by reopening the
nuclear door and beginning testing and development of a new generation of
nuclear weapons’."
Funding for nuclear weapons is
currently included in the Defense Appropriations bill that is expected to be
passed by the Republican controlled Congress.
Soft Democrats not wanting to deny funding to the troops, are likely to
approve the bill despite the nuclear rider. H
|
A
Review of What Health Studies are Needed and Which are Not
|
According to Preston Truman, not
only a downwinder, but long-term analyst of health studies related to radiation
fallout and the health impacts on innocent victims of this government
sanctioned tragedy offers the following analysis.
There
is a need for studies on what happened and how it happened - the actual biological process that lead FROM exposure,
to cancer or other illnesses, directed toward early detection and treatment
possibilities, BUT not studies to see if there was an exposure, and if that
exposure - which the levels of and risks from and all that can, and will be
debated by each scientific camp for decades more. We know there was exposure,
deliberate willful exposure and then just as deliberate lies and cover up over
it. We also know from what data is there from places like the cancer registry
and the graveyards, that people got hurt. Rehashing that isn't necessary.
BUT learning
how the health effects occurred once it is accepted they did, studies aimed at
saving lives and providing better treatment is quite another issue. I think that separation of studies into the
already answered - was there exposure, and did people get harmed -- from ‘Ok
why did it make some sick and cause cancers’
and so on, and what can we learn to better detect earlier those at risk and treat them better -- is
important to understand where a lot of us downwinders are coming from. We have
NO INTEREST in the former and really rather flatly oppose any more ‘did
anything happen.’
BUT will there
be support for early detection and better treatment related studies, and health
care related clinics and such. Cancers
are NOT the sum total of what resulted, and the other illnesses need to be brought in, many of which would
benefit form study and treatment research.
Other
independent analysts note that they are concerned about the fact that the problem goes far beyond the State of Idaho,
but certainly ID has among the most impacted counties. It's going to be a hard battle, however, to
show causation for diseases other than the thyroid, especially since almost all
government sponsored review committees refuse to highlight the possible
importance of radionuclides other than Iodine-131. Nevertheless, if the rules
for compensating workers were to be extended to the public, who were exposed
without informed consent, those with a diagnosed thyroid cancer (and perhaps
other forms of thyroid disease) would qualify for claims. The problem is that
the rules for worker compensation for potentially radiogenic cancers do not
apply to members of the public.[9] H
|
Calculating Radiation Dose
|
To review online calculators developed by federal public
health agencies go to the following sites:
National Institute of Health (NIH)
NIH IREP (This is the official NIH version of the
Interactive Radio-Epidemiological Program (IREP) that estimates the Excess
Relative Risk and Assigned Share/Probability of Causation for individuals
exposed in the past to radiation who have been diagnosed with cancer. This code
includes estimates for those exposed as children.)
http://198.144.166.5/irep_nih
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
NIOSH IREP (calculates the Excess Relative Risk and
Probability of Causation for radiation workers exposed in the past to radiation
who have been diagnosed with cancer)
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocasirep.html
IRAD (This is a prototype online calculator. It calculates
the dose, excess life-time risk, excess relative risk, and probability of
causation for those exposed to I-131 in the vicinity of Oak Ridge, TN. This is
the first program of its kind to include both local facility releases and
weapons fallout.) http://198.144.165.152/irad
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
NCI Dose/Risk Calculator for fallout I-131 (This is the
official NCI dose and risk calculator that estimates the thyroid dose and
future excess risk of developing thyroid cancer for those who were exposed and
who are presently free of disease). ttp://ntsi131.nci.nih.gov/
|
A timeless advisory from
Thomas
Jefferson
"A little
patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells
dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long
oppressions of enormous public debt ... If the game runs sometimes against us
at home we must have patience 'till luck turns, and then we shall have an
opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game
where principles are at stake."
Thomas Jefferson, 1798
...in opposition to the Sedition Act
|
Endnotes: