| |
|
Nagasaki and a nuclear energy renaissance
by Marie K.
| August 9, 2007 |
Re: Waiting for an Iranian Chernobyl
I decided to send this e-mail I wrote earlier (but didn’t send) in honor of the remembrance of the bombing of Nagasaki 62 years ago today. The accident at Chernobyl should also be remembered. I hope that nuclear weapons will never be used again and that safety at nuclear power plants is never overlooked.
In the article, the safety of Iran’s nuclear power plant
|
|
|
and other facilities related to it is discussed. It brings up the fact that Iran needs to receive assistance to make the Bushehr plant safer. It’s also about pressure the US is putting on the IAEA to prevent safety related technical assistance to Iran which is Iran’s right to receive as a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
Since the IAEA is the only independent provider, this is a very serious issue.
The article also states that the sanctions Iran faced prevented them from hiring contractors besides the Russians. Now, Israel is calling for more sanctions on Iran’s nuclear energy program. Finally and importantly, the author says that nuclear safety should be decoupled from political considerations.
What the article doesn’t mention is the issue of enrichment and Iran’s desire to produce its own nuclear fuel (carry out the nuclear fuel cycle itself). Several articles I have come across recently indicate that economic considerations as well as political may be involved in the accusations aimed at Iran.
In February 2004, President Bush and former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw made some proposals to change the NPT. Bush proposed that the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) not supply equipment and technologies related to enrichment (and also reprocessing) to countries that don’t already have such facilities. Straw proposed that countries that don’t carry out their safeguard activities adequately forfeit their right to develop the nuclear fuel cycle.
Maybe these proposals explain why Iran has been in such a rush to become a country that already has it’s own enrichment facilities. Maybe other countries less in the news are making similar efforts or they are feeling more pressured than ever to opt for nuclear power or more nuclear power plants or enrichment plants etc. NOW before more restrictions are put into place.
Why would such proposals be made? It just so happens that the US and the UK are 2 among just 5 countries (also France, Germany, and the Netherlands) that provide most of the supplies of nuclear fuel since they have the most large commercial enrichment plants. To put it plainly, the more countries that carry out the nuclear fuel cycle themselves, the more the “uranium cartel” would lose its control and earnings. Russia is also a big supplier but in its own separate marketplace.
Then, one day recently, BBC World had a program about the “renaissance of nuclear energy.” A BBC presenter
|
|
Glad you sent this in, Marie, and again, you say it well. So just step out of the way while I let loose a six-minute sigh.
I mean, f**k. Just f**k. You are so exactly right, and this “renaissance” of nuclear power is so wrong, so mega-frickin' stupid. Sigh again.
All the questions about nuclear power answer themselves, when insurance companies won't touch that industry. When special legislation is required to sidestep any financial liability for a worst case scenario.
Nuclear power was a big controversial issue when I was growing up. And that, please note, was not recently. How many millions of us marched in that battle for common sense? And that's one of the battles we won. The nuclear power industry was effectively scuttled, at least in America.
And now, as with so many other battles already fought and won, from civil rights to abortion, idiotic wars to abuse of Presidential powers, we're fighting the same battles all over again. Nuclear power? Dick Cheney's arse.
Swear to God, some days it just makes me weep. The purpose of fighting all those battles, winning all those battles, was to move on to better battles and continue the -- excuse the flowery prose here -- betterment of humankind. I mean, we should have had nationalized health care decades ago. The idea of these endless wars, all the hundreds of thousands dead for nothing, that should be for historians to wallow through by now. And instead... here we go again, and again, and again, reliving the stupidity of generations past.
Nuclear power? For f**k's sake. Sigh.
There are days I just want to say, f**k it all to hell.
|
Helen & Harry
|
|
|
went to a couple of nuclear power
plants, one was in India (India, Pakistan, and Israel are not NPT signatories).
The purpose of the program seemed to be to show that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is not such a scary endeavor. There are also groups and Internet sites promoting the idea of a “nuclear renaissance”--the World Nuclear Association and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), for example.
So why are they doing this at this time? Do they think Chernobyl has finally been forgotten? There IS a new generation of youth who probably don’t remember. The author of the article’s vivid descriptions sure were a good reminder, though.
Maybe the “renaissance” idea is to be a cover for the proposals (above) and others like them by countries with vested interests that push/pressure other countries to get on the nuclear “bandwagon” sooner rather than later. Certainly, the nuclear supplier countries wouldn’t mind getting more nuclear reactor contracts while they make up some new rules to make sure that THEY supply the fuel to the reactors once they are built. I even wonder if they care about whether more nuclear weapons could be made or whether more nuclear accidents could occur.
Interest in nuclear power HAD BEEN declining.
|
Our front page is free from nudity and profanity, but interior pages and external links may not be safe for work, and you may be shocked, offended, or in trouble with your boss. A link doesn't imply that we agree with every sentence and every sentiment on every site we link to. We use our noggins, and suggest you use yours.
Anything sent to Unknown News may be published. If you don't want it published, say so plainly. Of course, we publish all incoming hate mail.
|
|
|
| |
We sell our own progressive bumper stickers:
pro-peace,
anti-Bush,
pro-freedom,
anti-Republican
stickers you won't
find anywhere else.
$3 each or two for $5
bumper stickers
|
|
| |
|
Unknown News is more fun and more informative with your participation, so please don't be shy. Consider yourself invited to speak your mind.
Because we respect peoples' privacy, we do not keep records of friends' and contributors' contact information. This means we can't forward private communications between readers and writers, but we always welcome dialogue for publication.
When we publish incoming emails, we usually edit out the sender's last name, email address, or anything else that would tend to uniquely identify the author (if we slip up, please let us know). But if your email is unambiguously intended only to annoy, insult, or threaten us, we'll publish all the details, and leave it on-line forever.
We're especially interested in hearing and considering different perspectives. All we ask is that you conduct yourself sanely and civilly. For the most productive dialogue, it helps if you'll cite a specific article or concept we've gotten wrong.
You can contact Helen & Harry at <newsuneed at yahoo.com>. If that address ever fails, our back-up email address is <unknownnews at inbox.com>.
But please, don't email us unless you're really and truly, honestly, actually trying to send the publishers of News a communication you're not sending to anyone or everyone else.
Please don't send attachments or other cr*p we don't want.
If you're trying to reach us but getting no reply, it's probably because you've sent us cr*p we don't want, so we're filtering your emails into the trash, unopened and unread.
If you'd like to have your email address unblocked, simply send a sincere apology (from an un-blocked email address).
| |
|
Do they think Chernobyl has finally been forgotten?
There IS a new generation of youth who probably don’t remember. ...
|
|
|
|
| |
