[ RadSafe ] Blair Backs Nuclear Power to Tackle Climate, Energy Security

[Sandy Perle]

Index:

Blair Backs Nuclear Power to Tackle Climate, Energy Security 
Nuclear energy is back on Davos agenda
Nuclear agency studies options for KC plant
"Hot" patients setting off radiation alarms
Cancer Patient Sets Off Port Radiation Alarms
Radiation board reviews plan for recycling Oklahoma waste
===========================================

Blair Backs Nuclear Power to Tackle Climate, Energy Security 

Jan. 27 (Bloomberg) -- The U.K. needs nuclear power to meet its twin 
challenges of securing energy supplies and reducing emissions of 
gases that cause global warming, Prime Minister Tony Blair said. 

``I don't think we will tackle climate change'' and energy security 
``effectively unless nuclear power is part of it,'' Blair said in 
Davos, Switzerland, where he's attending the World Economic Forum. 

The U.K. government is likely to approve a new generation of nuclear 
power stations in coming months as the country attempts to reduce 
carbon dioxide emissions and secure alternatives to fading North Sea 
oil and gas reserves. 

``We are going to move from self sufficiency in gas to importing 90 
percent of it,'' he said. Faced with that reality and the need to 
reduce carbon emissions he said, ``how are we going to do that 
without nuclear being part of this mix?'' 

Blair said a new ``climate change bill in the next few weeks'' will 
allow ``individuals and businesses to help'' reduce emissions. 

New technology would help improve nuclear power, he said. In a 
reference to non-government organizations that say nuclear power is 
unsafe, he said ``pressure groups have an important role to play but 
leaders'' must take decisions.
------------------

Nuclear energy is back on Davos agenda

DAVOS, Switzerland Int. Herald Tribune Jan 26: Few subjects seem less 

suited to the intoxicating air of the World Economic Forum's annual 
conference than nuclear energy. Aging, expensive, unpopular and still 
vulnerable to catastrophic accidents, it is the antithesis of the 
kinds of cutting-edge solutions that beguile the wealthy and well-
intentioned who gather each winter in this Alpine ski resort.

And yet nuclear energy is suddenly back on the agenda here - and not 
just here. Spurred on by politicians interested in energy 
independence and scientists who specialize in the field of climate 
change, Germany is reconsidering a commitment to shut down its 
nuclear power plants. France, Europe's leading nuclear power 
producer, is increasing its investment, as is Finland.

At a time when industrialized countries are wrestling with how to 
curb emissions of carbon dioxide into the earth's atmosphere, nuclear 
energy has one indisputable advantage: Unlike coal, oil, natural gas 
or even biological fuels, it emits no carbon dioxide. That virtue, in 
the view of advocates, is enough to offset its well-documented 
shortcomings.

"It has put nuclear back into the mix," said Daniel Esty, director of 
the Center for Environmental Law and Policy at Yale University. 
"We're seeing a new balancing of the costs and benefits."

But being in the mix does not mean nuclear energy will shove aside 
fossil fuels any time soon.

Today in Europe
 
Russians work on their image at Davos Officials change tactics on 
trade negotiations Small screens, new programs
Renewable energy, while growing steadily, has limitations: Windmills 
don't turn when the wind isn't blowing, geothermal energy is not yet 
economical enough, and hydroelectric dams can be disruptive 
themselves.

That leaves nuclear power as a "clean" alternative to fossil fuels. 
It already generates one-sixth of the world's electricity, but it 
fell out of favor in the West two decades ago after accidents at 
Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. The previous German government, in 
fact, pledged to shut down its last nuclear power station by 2022.

But now Germany has also committed itself to deep reductions in 
carbon dioxide emissions in the coming decade, and its new 
chancellor, Angela Merkel, recently rekindled the debate over nuclear 
energy when she said, "We should consider what consequences it will 
have if we shut off our nuclear power plants."

That comment was a reference to Europe's increasing vulnerability as 
an importer of foreign fossil fuels. Just as the United States 
worries about disruptions in the supply of Middle East oil, Europe 
worries about Rssia's penchant for using its gas and oil pipelines 
as a political weapon.

Even in the United States, which has not ordered cuts in carbon 
dioxide emissions, there are more voices in favor of building nuclear 
plants.

Critics point out that nuclear reactors are astronomically expensive, 
and take a decade or more to build, even if environmental groups fail 
to block construction.

Given the entrenched opposition in parts of Western Europe and 
America, some experts say that if the world does turn to nuclear 
power, most of the new plants will be in China, India and other 
developing countries.

They also point out that the issue of security cuts both ways. 
Building more plants may reduce a country's reliance on imported oil 
and gas, but it also creates more targets for terrorist attacks. And 
there is the nuclear fuel cycle: North Korea and other countries are 
already suspected of diverting enriched uranium to try to make 
nuclear weapons. Those dangers would only multiply with an increase 
in the global demand for nuclear power.

John Holdren, the director of the Woods Hole Research Center, said 
that if current economic predictions held, nuclear energy would have 
to generate one-third of the world's electricity by 2100 if it were 
used to curb the rise in carbon dioxide emissions. That would require 
a tenfold increase in the number of plants, to more than 3,000.

To manage such a risk, Holdren said, the world would need a radically 
new regime for policing nuclear technology. One option would be 
international supervision of all nuclear plants. But is that 
realistic? Could all countries be treated equally?

The United Nations is now demanding that Iran suspend its enrichment 
of uranium to forestall the possibility that it might be used for 
weapons. It would be, at the least, awkward for European countries to 

plunge back into nuclear energy at the same time that European 
diplomats are demanding that the Iranians scale back their nuclear 
ambitions.

Of course, there is another alternative: energy efficiency. But under 
the snow-capped peaks of Davos, the idea of simply turning down the 
thermostat has not yet caught on.
------------------

Nuclear agency studies options for KC plant

The Kansas City Star Jan 27 - The federal agency in charge of the 
nuclear weapons parts plant at the Bannister Federal Complex has 
begun searching for a replacement facility. A decision is expected in 
April.  

The National Nuclear Security Administration is in the early stages 
of a "transformation planning process" that is expected to lead to a 
smaller, more efficient manufacturing plant to be completed by 2010 
and fully operational by 2012.

"The NNSA is transforming all of its infrastructure, not just here, 
but at all eight facilities around the country," said Mark Holocek, 
deputy site manager.

The new plant is expected to be located on either the existing 
Bannister property in south Kansas City or a greenfield site 
somewhere in the metropolitan area.

The current Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies plant 
employs about 2,600 people and manufactures nonradioactive parts for 
the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The new facility is expected to employ 
about 2,000 people and save the NNSA $100 million.

Local NNSA officials recently received permission to continue 
planning for a new facility in the area. There had been some concern 
the operation might be relocated to one of the seven other nuclear 
weapons facilities the NNSA operates around the country.

The plant contributes significantly to the local economy. It had a 
$193 million payroll last year and purchased $41.9 million in goods 
from Missouri businesses and $15 million from Kansas businesses, 
according to the NNSA. The bulk of the employees, 1,792, lived in 
Missouri.

The NNSA is now working to determine which options to pursue for the 
plant´s future, Holocek said. The building options are renovating the 
west side of the existing Bannister Federal Complex, building a new 
facility on the Bannister property, or a greenfield lease in the 
Kansas City area.

The agency must also determine whether it wants to seek funding to 
build the plant itself or have the General Services Administration 
build a plant and lease it to the NNSA.

Should the GSA be chosen to manage the project, congressional 
approval would be expected in October and a development contract 
would be awarded in spring 2008.
---------------

"Hot" patients setting off radiation alarms

MIAMI (Reuters) - When 75,000 football fans pack into Dolphin Stadium 
in Miami for the Super Bowl on February 4, at least a few may want to 
carry notes from their doctors explaining why they're radioactive 
enough to set off "dirty bomb" alarms. 
 
With the rising use of radioisotopes in medicine and the growing use 
of radiation detectors in a security-conscious nation, patients are 
triggering alarms in places where they may not even realize they're 
being scanned, doctors and security officials say.

Nearly 60,000 people a day in the United States undergo treatment or 
tests that leave tiny amounts of radioactive material in their 
bodies, according to the Society of Nuclear Medicine. It is not 
enough to hurt them or anyone else, but it is enough to trigger 
radiation alarms for up to three months.

Since the September 11 attacks, the U.S. Department of        
Homeland Security has distributed more than 12,000 hand-held 
radiation detectors, mainly to Customs and Border Protection agents 
at airports, seaports and border crossings. Sensors are also used at 
government buildings and at large public events like the Super Bowl 
that are considered potential terrorist targets.

At the annual Christmas tree-lighting party in New York City's 
Rockefeller Center in November, police pulled six people aside in the 
crowd and asked them why they had tripped sensors.

"All six had recently had medical treatments with radioisotopes in 
their bodies," Richard Falkenrath, the city's deputy commissioner for 
counterterrorism, told a Republican governors' meeting in Miami 
recently. "That happens all the time."

Radioisotopes are commonly used to diagnose and treat certain cancers 
and thyroid disorders, to analyze heart function, or to scan bones 
and lungs.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission first recommended in 2003 that 
doctors warn patients they may set off alarms after being injected or 
implanted with radioisotopes. That came after police stopped a bus 
that set off a radiation detector in a New York City tunnel. They 
found one of the passengers had recently undergone thyroid treatment 
with radioiodine.

In August, the British Medical Journal described the case of a very 
embarrassed 46-year-old Briton who set off the sensors at Orlando 
airport in Florida six weeks after having radioiodine treatment for a 
thyroid condition.

He was detained, strip-searched and sniffed by police dogs before 
eventually being released, the journal said in its "Lesson of the 
Week" section.

"I'M HOT!"

Workers in the nuclear industry have dealt with the problem for 
years. Ken Clark, a spokesman in Atlanta for the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, has had a treadmill stress test every two years since 
undergoing bypass surgery 23 years ago.

His doctor injects him with a tiny amount of radioactive thallium, 
makes him run on a treadmill and then uses a gamma ray camera to 
monitor blood flow in his heart.

That can leave him slightly radioactive for up to 30 days and Clark 
knows to carry a note from his doctor during that time, especially if 
he visits nuclear power plants.

"I have in the past had one of the health physicists bring a little 
hand-held survey meter and hold it up to my chest and lo and behold, 
I'm hot!" Clark said.

"You just don't let people in and out of places when they're emitting 
some sort of radioactivity," he added.

The length of time patients give off enough radiation to set off 
alarms varies. For some scans, like the FDG-PET scans often used to 
screen for cancer, it's less than 24 hours. For thyroid treatment 
with radioiodine, it can be as long as 95 days, the Society of 
Nuclear Medicine said.

Dr. Henry Royal, a past president of the society who practices at the 

Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology at Washington University in St. 
Louis, Missouri, gives patients who plan to travel cards detailing 
what radionuclides were used and how much was given. 

The cards have a 24-hour phone number police can call to confirm the 
treatment, "so if they're stopped, hopefully they can get the problem 
solved more efficiently," Royal said. 

Nobody keeps good data on how often patients get stopped. Customs and 

Border Protection spokesman Zachary Mann said it's relatively 
infrequent at airports, and that passengers who set off hand-held 
sensors are typically escorted to a private office for questioning 
that clears up the matter. 

If there's doubt, a more sophisticated device is used to identify the 
type of radiation, said Mann, who once set off another agent's 
portable detector after a treadmill test. 

There were nearly 20 million nuclear medical procedures performed in 
the United States in 2005, up 15 percent from four years earlier, so 
the number of people who could potentially be mistaken for terrorists 
is enormous. 

"We hope that people who have radiation detectors are aware of the 
problem ... and that they treat people with respect," Royal said.
-----------------

Cancer Patient Sets Off Port Radiation Alarms

The Port Of Palm Beach was evacuated for a little over an hour Friday 
after a woman accidently set off radiation detection alarms, Riviera 
Beach spokeswoman Rossanne Brown said. 
 
Brown told WPBF-TV that sensors at the port had detected trace 
amounts of radiation emitting from the woman around 12:40 p.m. 
Friday.

Officials said the woman is an employee at the port and when she came 
onto the property, she set off radiation alarms customs officers 
wear.

According to Brown, the woman was isolated, interviewed and deemed 
not to be a threat. Brown told WPBF that the woman was released after 
port officials deemed the cause of the alarm triggering was due to 
the her recently having undergone radiation treatments for cancer.

The port was reopened around 2 p.m. Friday.
---------------

Radiation board reviews plan for recycling Oklahoma waste

The Sierra Club has appealed the project, but others insist it poses 
no danger to people

BLANDING The Salt Lake Tribune Jan 27  - A southeastern Utah uranium 
plant adapted to hard times for more than a decade by eking 
yellowcake out of the waste produced by other metal mills. But 
International Uranium Corp.'s (IUC) latest request to use tailings as 
raw materials came under fire Friday as the Utah Radiation Control 
Board reviewed a request to recycle 32,000 tons of waste from an 
Oklahoma metals plant cleanup. The yellowcake uranium would be 
recycled from the Oklahoma waste at IUC's controversial White Mesa 
mill, just south of Blanding. State regulators OK'd the plan in June, 
but the Glen Canyon chapter of the Sierra Club appealed, triggering 
the radiation board's review. In a daylong hearing, attorneys for the 

Sierra Club said the Oklahoma waste belongs in a landfill for 
hazardous or radioactive waste. The high concentration of 
contaminants like radium and heavy metals that would be dumped in 
tailings ponds behind the Blanding mill would pose a threat, they 
said. Their arguments go to a longtime criticism of the White Mesa 
plant - that recycling yellowcake from waste is "sham disposal," a 
cheap way to get rid of waste, as opposed to a method for selling the 
uranium extracted from the waste. The radiation board decided to 
delay a decision on the Oklahoma waste. They want to be confident the 
waste won't contaminate the environment and put people at risk. "Even 
though there's no evidence of contamination right now, it's something 
we need to pay attention to," said Joette Langianese, a Grand County 
commissioner and member of the board. Past tests have showed 
chemicals have leaked from the site, but it is not clear if IUC was 
responsible. There also is no proof that putting the Oklahoma waste 
in the tailings pond will contaminate the environment. Some board 
members described a dilemma: There's no proof of groundwater 
contamination now, but because the tailings ponds are 27 years old 
and built with outdated technology, problems might occur. "There is 
no evidence that anybody has ever been harmed by the activity at the 
White Mesa mill in 27 years," said Michael Zody, an attorney for IUC. 

This is the first time the board has been asked to consider a 
shipment of these "alternative feed materials" since the state 
assumed oversight of mills from the federal government more than two 
years ago

Sandy Perle
Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614 

Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714  Extension 2306
Fax:(949) 296-1144

E-Mail: sperle at dosimetry.com
E-Mail: sandyfl at cox.net 

Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/ 
Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/