From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #173 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Tuesday, August 31 1999 Volume 01 : Number 173 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 21:04:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space Subject: (abolition-usa) Star Wars Test News Release Friends: Please help us by copying and sending this news release to your local media. Thanks. Bruce Gagnon STAR WARS MISSILE TEST DRAWS INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: BRUCE GAGNON (352) 337-9274 The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space is organizing an international effort on September 13-15 to oppose the revitalized Star Wars plans of the Clinton administration and the U.S. Congress. Calling it the Star Wars International Call-In Days, activists around the world will be speaking out in opposition to a scheduled Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) test planned in September over the Pacific Ocean by the Pentagon. Congress has voted to allow the BMD system to move forward as "soon as technically feasible". The Clinton administration is now beginning to consider circumventing the 1972 ABM Treaty that outlaws the development of weapons systems like the BMD. Clinton is scheduled to make a final deployment decision on the BMD in June, 2000. According to Global Network Coordinator Bruce Gagnon, "With Democrats and Republicans recently voting to allow early deployment of BMD, the door has been opened wide for the deployment of space-based weapons. We are talking about moving the arms race into space! The cost in tax dollars will be staggering and the threat to world peace will be enormous. People understand that putting lasers in space is an offensive strategy. We are organizing a global response to this craziness." Global Network organizers are calling on the public to contact the White House and Congress between September 13-15 with the message No BMD, No Star Wars. Activists in other parts of the world will be contacting the U.S. Embassy in their country with the same message. The Star Wars International Call-In Days will mark the beginning of a year long campaign being organized by the Global Network. Throughout 2000 a series of events will target the Star Wars issue. Included in these actions will be a demonstration at the Treasury Department on April 14 highlighting the $100 billion that has been spent on Star Wars development to date and an International conference on the subject the following day. On October 7, 2000 an International Day of Protest to Stop the Militarization of Space will be held. Check the Global Network website at: http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk # # # # - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 20:09:41 -0700 From: Jackie Cabasso Subject: (abolition-usa) More Trouble for Livermore Lab; NIF Chief Resigns! http://www.hotcoco.com/news/alameda/trivalley/stories/bdu08092.htm Conta Costa Times (California) Published Saturday, August 28, 1999 NIF head quits amid Ph.D. flap Acclaimed Lawrence Livermore laser physicist never finished his degree By David Holbrook and Andrea Widener LIVERMORE Lawrence Livermore Laboratory's top laser scientist, head of the project that is building the world's most powerful laser, resigned Friday after it was revealed he never earned a doctorate from Princeton University. Michael Campbell, a renowned physicist who was responsible for the $1.2 billion National Ignition Facility project, said this week he failed to complete his doctoral dissertation after being hired by the lab in 1977. But he never informed supervisors and colleagues at the lab, where his doctorate was commonly cited and he was referred in lab literature as Dr. E. Michael Campbell. In an interview with the Times this week, a distraught Campbell said personal issues had prevented him from completing his doctorate 22 years ago. He also said the need for a doctorate became increasingly insignificant as he made a rapid rise through the lab's laser fusion programs, an assertion confirmed by highplaced colleagues. "It would be a waste of time and talent to continue to pursue a dissertation in some cases," said David Crandall, the Department of Energy official overseeing the NIF project. "Michael never got his done, and after a while I think he stopped resisting being called 'doctor.'" Campbell's lack of a degree became common knowledge early this week when anonymous faxes streamed into the office of lab Director Bruce Tarter and several other departments at the lab. Campbell immediately told Tarter he didn't hold a doctorate and voluntarily took personal leave, lab officials said. Although he resigned as head of the NIF project, Campbell is still employed as a technical adviser. Lab officials are still investigating whether he lied about holding a doctorate during the hiring process. Lab officials said they are unlikely to release the results of their investigation because it involves a personnel issue. Lab spokeswoman Susan Houghton said officials have confirmed through Princeton that Campbell completed his doctoral course work but never finished his dissertation. In a statement that illustrated the high regard Campbell enjoys at the lab, Tarter said the Danville resident has "made extraordinary technical contributions and provided exceptional leadership for laser programs." "We look forward to his future contributions," Tarter said. Tarter appointed George Miller, associate director for national security, to take over temporary leadership of the laser program division. Campbell's sudden decision to take leave this week spawned widespread speculation at the lab, including suggestions that it was related to cost overruns in the construction of NIF. The muchheralded laser is intended to allow scientists to maintain nuclear weapons without the need for explosives testing. However, Campbell said the circumstances that led to his resignation did not involve any problems with the project. "This has nothing to do with NIF," he said. "It's to do with me personally." Houghton confirmed Campbell's comment. She said a meeting scheduled next week between Campbell and highlevel Department of Energy officials to discuss NIF's progress was made before the doctorate issue arose. Stress related to other laser programs under his supervision convinced Campbell that he should take leave this week, he said. "I have a young family, and I need to spend some time with them," he said. "My wife has said the lab has sucked the life out of me." Campbell said he had no idea why anyone would investigate his background and leak the results to lab officials. "I don't know what they did it for," he said. "All my life I've tried not to hurt anybody." Campbell is a popular, enthusiastic figure at the lab and has many defenders, all of whom said it's common to hire doctoral candidates before they complete their dissertations. Such scholars are referred to as ABDs; the letters refer to "all but dissertation" status. Once hired, an ABD's career advancement generally comes through scientific breakthroughs rather than educational credentials. "At this point in Michael's career, his accomplishments have far outstripped any meaning about a doctorate," Crandall said. Houghton said none of Campbell's jobs at the labs required a doctorate, and his claim to one played no role in winning the $196,500 position as associate director of laser programs. Campbell became head of the lab's laser programs in 1994, and has since helped win 19 awards from the prominent Research & Development publication. Among many honors, Campbell has won the American Physical Society's award for Excellence in Plasma Physics Research, the Edward Teller Medal and a 197273 Guggenheim fellowship. In 1994, Campbell won the prestigious E.O. Lawrence Award for "distinguished leadership in helping to propel laserdriven inertial confinement fusion to the forefront of physics research." Andrea Widener covers science and the area's national laboratories. You can reach her at 9258472158 or mail to: awidener@cctimes.com 1999 Contra Costa Newspapers, Inc. ****************************************************** Jacqueline Cabasso, Executive Director WESTERN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION 1440 Broadway, Suite 500 Oakland, California USA 94612 Tel: +(510)839-5877 Fax: +(510)839-5397 E-mail: wslf@earthlink.net ****************************************************** Western States Legal Foundation is part of ABOLITION 2000 A GLOBAL NETWORK TO ELIMINATE NUCLEAR WEAPONS - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 20:27:47 -0700 From: Jackie Cabasso Subject: (abolition-usa) Lack of data at NTS; even MORE problems for Livermore Lab! Las Vegas ReviewJournal Saturday, August 28, 1999 Copyright; Las Vegas ReviewJournal Report: Test site models flawed Scientists lack the data to predict radioactive releases from nuclear test cavities, an independent panel says. By Keith Rogers ReviewJournal Computer models designed to forecast radioactive releases from cavities left by nuclear weapons tests in Nevada have serious flaws and lack the data to support them, according to an independent panel of scientists who reviewed the models. A confidential report prepared by the scientists, a copy of which was obtained by the ReviewJournal, suggests that more data be collected and more test wells drilled to monitor key areas at the Nevada Test Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The report drew strong comment from U.S. Sen. Richard Bryan, DNev., who said he was "greatly bothered" by its conclusions. The two models were developed as part of a $170 million program to predict where radioactive remnants from belowground nuclear weapons blasts would travel after the materials were injected into aquifers at the test site. They will be part of a warning mechanism, along with a system of monitoring wells, to assure the public can be protected from potential radioactive releases for centuries to come. The models and wells are independent of those being developed for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, on the southwest edge of the test site, where the federal government wants to entomb the nation's highlevel radioactive waste. Given that the contamination stems from nuclear tests, in some cases going back more than 40 years, Bryan said he now has even less faith that models can predict any radioactive leaks that might come from waste in Yucca Mountain over 10,000 years. "This is another example of the assurances that Nevadans have been given for more than a generation when it comes to matters relating to nuclear issues," he said. "These assurances we've been given for decades are much less certain." "If we contaminate an aquifer or water source, we have a real public health crisis," Bryan said. Allen Biaggi, administrator of the state Environmental Protection Division, said the division "has had longstanding concerns with the models that are being developed for the test site." Energy Department officials reacted Friday to questions about the 60page report, which is marked "not for public release." They said one reason the data doesn't appear complete is because the bulk of the information is classified and could not be shared with the panel. "I'm not real surprised with the (panel's) results," said Bob Bangerter, manager of the Energy Department's Underground Test Area Project. "Our next step will be to develop a plan to address the concerns in the peer review report. Anytime you do a peer review, you don't expect it to come out in flying colors," he said, noting, "I believe they did a very good, thorough evaluation." ONE MODEL, DEVELOPED BY THE LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY IN CALIFORNIA FOR THE UNDERGROUND TEST AREA PROJECT, WAS SUPPOSED TO ESTIMATE THE STRENGTH OF RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINANTS IN GROUND WATER. THAT INFORMATION THEN WOULD BE PLUGGED INTO A GROUND WATER TRANSPORT MODEL DEVELOPED BY IT CORP. A COPY OF THE PEER REVIEW PANEL'S AUG. 3 DRAFT REPORT SAYS "THE DEGREE OF UNCERTAINTY IN THE (LAWRENCE LIVERMORE) MODEL PREDICTIONS IS UNDERESTIMATED" AND "THERE ARE ALSO CONCERNS THAT THE EXISTING DATA ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREDICT THE RATE OF RELEASE OF RADIONUCLIDES" SUCH AS POTENTIALLY DEADLY PLUTONIUM239, CESIUM137, STRONTIUM90, NEPTUNIUM237, IODINE129 AND COBALT60. THE INTENT OF THE LAWRENCE LIVERMORE MODEL WAS TO PREDICT RELEASES FROM ABOUT 260 NUCLEAR TEST CAVITIES THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF CONTAMINATING GROUND WATER THAT COULD MIGRATE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY OF THE TEST SITE. IT Corp.'s ground water transport model was aimed at predicting the range beyond which the contaminants would not exceed the safe guideline, a 4 millirem annual dose to humans within 1,000 years. A millirem is onethousandth of a rem, the dose unit for measuring the effect of radiation on the body. The Energy Department, which operates the test site, intends to submit the model for approval by the Nevada Environmental Protection Division under a federal facilities agreement and consent order with the state. The modeling effort was designed to assure safety of Nevadans for up to 1,000 years from radioactivity left from 10 belowground nuclear bomb blasts at the test site's Frenchman Flat. This is the first of six such "corrective action units," the report says. The panel found the models are flawed for a number of reasons and they could not be used to assess the other five corrective action units, which lump groups of the remaining 250 test cavities. Those are located in other areas of the test site where the soils and hydrology are different from Frenchman Flat, according to the consensus report by the sixmember review panel led by Lynn Gelhar. Gelhar, a civil and environmental engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was not available for comment Friday. Besides inadequate data, the review panel found errors with calculations; cumbersome links between the Frenchman Flat models and a regional model of the entire 1,350squaremile test site; and a lack of consistency between the the Lawrence Livermore and IT reports. "These problems add uncertainty to the results of the model calculations," the draft report says, referring to the "lack of consistency in mass transport data." Uncertainty with the computer models "is likely to be much larger than that calculated because a number of factors have not been adequately addressed," the report said. The panel was charged with reviewing the strategies and methods of data collection, evaluating the results of ground water modeling efforts and commenting on "omission, shortcomings, errors, or ineffective strategies" that were used, the report said. In all, between 1951 and 1992, when fullscale U.S. nuclear weapons tests were put on hold indefinitely, government scientists conducted 928 nuclear tests at the Nevada Test Site, of which all but 100 were conducted below ground. With many of the key issues unresolved, the panel recommended that more field data be collected, measurements that reflect the data be made in the laboratory and more appropriate models be developed. That means monitoring wells should be drilled into plumes of contaminants migrating from test cavities so scientists can determine where and how large the plumes are, and how far radionuclides are spreading based on samples collected and analyzed over a period of years. While the models of the Frenchman Flat detonations and ground water flows parallel sound science, the panel says they can't be applied because no data exist to validate them and work has not been completed to determine where the contamination plumes are located. This story is located at: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/1999/Aug28Sat1999/news/11831803.html For comment or questions, please email to:webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright Las Vegas ReviewJournal, 1997, 1998, 1999 ****************************************************** Jacqueline Cabasso, Executive Director WESTERN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION 1440 Broadway, Suite 500 Oakland, California USA 94612 Tel: +(510)839-5877 Fax: +(510)839-5397 E-mail: wslf@earthlink.net ****************************************************** Western States Legal Foundation is part of ABOLITION 2000 A GLOBAL NETWORK TO ELIMINATE NUCLEAR WEAPONS - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:28:21 +1000 From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign Subject: (abolition-usa) Y2K AND ENERGY Excerpt from "The Millennium Reckoning", September 1999 Update (Free copyright with attribution). Go to: http://www.trendmonitor.com for full report RISKS / ENERGY IMPLICATIONS If the Russian natural gas pipeline supplying both Eastern and Western Europe is interrupted, as Russian experts say it almost certainly will be, it will be a very difficult to start the gas flowing again with an uncertain electricity supply and sub-zero temperatures. Oil stops flowing at freezing temperatures which means that pipelines and refineries are at risk, even if there are relatively short power outages. In the US, which is far ahead of Russia in its preparations for the energy sector, "major" oil companies are reported adopting a fix on fail (FOF) policy on wells, pipelines and refineries. Another reported implication is that if the electricity fails, some nuclear plants may have difficulty cooling their cores if they are to be shut down, creating a real danger of accidental melt-downs. The economic, environmental and social implications of the failure of the Russian gas and oil pipeline network are so enormous - for Europe and the rest of the world - that the necessary resources must be made available on an international level to ensure that: i. the operation of the Siberian gas pipeline network is made secure, ii. nuclear reactors everywhere have sustainable back up electrical systems which do not depend on national grids, iii. as many alternative local electricity sources are built as possible. All the countries of Europe and all the people of Europe are at risk of having to deal with the consequences of severe energy shortages and consequent energy price increases. Although it is not certain that this scenario will come true, even if no remedial action is taken, the seriousness of the multiple risks warrants emergency action now on a "just in case" basis. A huge investment in sustainable energy systems is required, both for deployment around nuclear sites and within communities. The task could be doable in the time remaining if an international crash programme were to be implemented in the next few weeks. It is a question of mobilising people and money to secure the future very quickly. Not only would the short-term problem be solved, but also the implementation of an economical long-term solution could be accomplished at the same time. A first step would be a comprehensive upgrade and support programme for Emergency Diesel Generators worldwide. Continuing denial by governments and the media of the possible magnitude of the risk to key energy systems is the greatest danger at the moment because it is preventing people and companies from making appropriate contingency preparations. STORIES Oil and Gas An April 1999, article in Computer Business Review quotes Professor Andrey Terekhov, a Russian Y2K expert, saying "the gas and electricity started work so late that their systems simply will not be ready in time". The article concludes that this news has "ominous implications", not just for Russia, "but also for the countries in Europe which are dependent on Russian gas". [1] In August 1999, it is reported in Computer Weekly that the total money spent "so far" in Russia was $80 million (=A348 million). [11] Yet, a report published in a French industry publication Enerpresse in March 1999 quotes a Gazprom executive saying that his company had virtually solved the "probleme du bogue" with new control software. [No mention was made of embedded chip systems.] [12] In March 1999, UK energy companies are seen as well prepared, according both to their own spokesmen and to Action 2000's colour coding scheme. [2] However, in June 1999, the Financial Times reports that the energy industry is still "spending heavily to ensure that their complex computer systems suffer no ill effects" from the millennium change over. The article warns that "anticipation of chaos" is liable to push up the price of oil as the end of the year approaches. The article also questions the well publicised confidence of the energy sector citing Chevron which said "it could not tell whether it would suffer significant business interruptions, including the shut down of its entire oil and gas production", although the company expected disruptions to be "localised". [3] Sources within the US oil industry are quoted in an Editorial appearing on the Golden Eagle Website saying: "Overall, these sources estimate that based on prior limited testing, they are expecting a 10 to 20% ratio of failure, or multiple embedded systems going down on each oil well. There will be no parts to fix them and no replacement systems available for quite a long while. These sources tell me that the major oil companies have adopted a FOF policy (fix on fail), because it is the only affordable and practical approach." "The bottom line: Most oil well embedded systems were never, and are never going to be checked or tested for Y2K compliance. Its a virtual impossibility PLUS... And even if they did, most likely the parts to replace them will no longer be available. It's now become very difficult to find anyone who can supply a replacement system before 1/1/2000. Some easier testing was done on more accessible systems, which are usually newer. Understandably, fail rates have soared 25% in some areas. On the subject of oil and gas pipelines, the author says, "The same that was said about the well heads and embedded systems is true for the pipelines. It's just too complicated - and the major companies decided to adopt the FOF policy - and wait to see what breaks down and to subsequently try to fix it. Another consideration is loss of electricity for any significant length of time." The other point made in the article is that the oil industry -- like so many others -- works on the basis of a just in time supply principle. Consequently stocks of oil and natural gas are very low. [4] This perception is confirmed by the International Energy Authority which says in a July 1999 report, "One of the most important findings is that just-in-time energy supplies present the greatest risk of failure. These energy supplies, electricity and gas, are dependent on a complex delivery infrastructure". The report says "Vulnerabilities still exist at all levels of the oil supply chain". Specifically, "Oil and gas pipelines have been identified as an area of ongoing concern. Most potential problems lie in pipeline control and monitoring systems and a vulnerability to disruptions in the electricity supply." Offshore production is seen to be "generally at greater risk" than onshore production "because of the accessibility problems encountered when testing subsea equipment". [10] Electricity In both the US and the UK, there has been very little press concern about the readiness of the electrical generation and distribution grid utilities. However, a draft report by the US Army entitled Y2K Analyses for Complex Systems of Systems, published in January 1999, provides a critical view. The report concludes that the possibility of serious electrical power disruption is very real despite what it describes as the growing optimism of the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC). Some of the reasons given for this conclusion are that "industry deregulation since 1996 may have made the electrical power grid more vulnerable to Y2K", as "competition produces far more inter-grid power wheeling, stressing transmission stability beyond industry modeling and planning". The report argues that the "unbundling of generation, transmission, distribution and brokering makes coordinated exchange of information and action more difficult" and large scale testing impossible. According to the study, "the industry systems for modeling and analyzing contingencies emphasize continued operation in spite of the "most severe single contingency" making them inherently "far less capable of dealing with multiple and dispersed contingencies". However, Y2K failures are liable to be "multiple and geographically dispersed - even if not catastrophic individually". Industry strategy is said to "to assume that all required fixes or workarounds to the initial failure - can be made quickly, thus allowing the system to reconstitute itself in hours or days". The question is asked: "What if the Y2K fixes take weeks?" [19] Nuclear In May 1999 The Financial Times reports, "The French Institute of Nuclear Safety reported that safety at France's nuclear power stations could be jeopardised by the millennium computer bug. The institute said the plants were threatened by failures from both their own computer systems and problems with the French electricity grid. It found that between 45 per cent and 80 per cent of internal systems "could be sensitive" to the Y2K problem." [18] On August 22, 1999, the Observer reports a study by nuclear engineer, John Large, commissioned by Greenpeace, which suggests that "the millennium bug could jeopardise the safety of Britains nuclear power plants" and "raises alarming questions over the international nuclear industry's preparedness for year 2000 computer problems". According to the report, "One of the major concerns is that facilities linked to the nuclear plants, such as the national grid and local telecommunications networks may fail at the time when the plants need them most." The article quotes Frank Barnaby, a nuclear physicist working for the independent Oxford Research Group, "There seems to be a very strange complacency about the who Y2K issue within the UK nuclear industry". Spokesperson for the UK's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate is also quoted saying "They have nothing to worry about." [14] On the same day, The Independent on Sunday reports that "Britain's nuclear watchdog has issued a warning to atomic power stations about the dangers of a millennium-like computer bug which is due to strike on 9 September." [15] An article by Helen Caldicott is published in The Los Angeles Times on August 17, 1999 which says that "at a White House meeting I attended recently with John Koskenin, the head of the president's Y2K committee, representatives of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Department of Defense and four independent experts, the government representatives dismissed concerns that were raised while providing no substantive basis for confidence that we do not face potentially irregular, and possibly serious, nuclear accidents on or after Jan.1, 2000". According to the article, "Nuclear power plants are dependent upon an intact external electricity supply to maintain the circulation of about 1 million gallons of water per minute to cool the radioactive core and also to keep the spent fuel pools cool. If a section of the grid goes down, the approximately 100-ton fissioning uranium core in the affected reactor will melt within two hours if the two back up diesel generators--whose reliability has been estimated at 85%--fail." The point is also made that " Unlike the reactor cores, most of the spent fuel pools, which hold four to five times more radioactivity than the core, have no back up power supply nor containment vessel, and thus could melt within 48 hours if the reactor has been recently refueled; if not, they would melt within two weeks without cooling water. Twenty-six U.S. reactors are scheduled for refueling before Jan. 1." While Koskenin is reported admitting the possibility of "random power outages" in the US, "he did not address the issue of the precarious back-up generators nor the fact that the NRC requires only one week of diesel fuel at each reactor site, even though local power outages could last longer." [17] According to a database called "Diesel Generator Defects at US Nuclear Plants" compiled by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, reports from January 1, 1999 to the present "show that defects and problems occur on a weekly basis in the US nuclear power industry. There are 27 reports affecting 41 plants; or 40% of all US commercial nuclear plants so far this year." Scott D. Portzline of Three Mile Island Alert comments in "The Weakest Link: Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs)" that during a "station blackout" (loss of offsite power) these generators "supply the electricity needed to bring the plant to a safe shutdown". If they fail, it is said that the chance of an accident "approaches certainty". Former NRC Chairman Dr. Shirley Jackson is also quoted saying, "NRC reviews in recent years have left no doubt that a station blackout at a nuclear power station is a major contributor to reactor core damage frequency." Although the NRC is reported to be claiming a 97.5 per cent reliability, "watchdogs say it is lower". [9] Reuters reported from the US on June 18, 1999 in an article entitled "US proposes stock piling radiation antidote", that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) had proposed the stockpiling of potassium iodide, which helps "prevent radioactive iodine from being lodged in the thyroid gland, where it could lead to thyroid cancer or other illness". [5] A report in The Times, on August 25, 1999, says "US nuclear power industry regulators have discovered that around one-third of the nation's 103 nuclear power stations have yet to resolve all of their Y2K problems". Although safety systems are said to be 100 bug free, 15 stations are reported to be "still working on systems that might shut down power generation". [16] In an article entitled, "The accidental Armageddon" in The Australian, Helen Caldicott, an anti-nuclear energy campaigner, warns that the circulation of coolant water is "dependent on an external electricity supply and an intact telecommunications system. If the millennium bug causes power failures and/or telecommunication malfunctions, reactors will be vulnerable. Because of this possibility, each US reactor has been equipped with two back-up diesel generators. But at best these are only 85 per cent reliable. So, in the event of a prolonged power failure, the back-up diesel generators will not necessarily prevent a nuclear catastrophe. And 67 Russian-built reactors are even more vulnerable, because they have no back-up generators. "What is more, the Russian electricity grid is itself at great risk because, as one might expect, the political and economic turmoil in that country means the Y2K problem has hardly been examined. There are 70 old nuclear reactors on old Russian submarines moored at dock in the Barents Sea. If they were to lose the electricity grid powering their cooling systems, they would melt." The article advocates a crash program to provide all the world's nuclear reactors with Wind and Solar electricity generators in order to insure that enough electricity is always available for cooling necessary to prevent meltdowns. [6] An article in the Independent on July 4, 1999 cites an internal memo circulated in the British Embassy in Moscow, which says that Russia is "one of the countries most vulnerable to Y2K problems". Among the concerns listed in the article is "back up generators for nuclear power stations". [7] "Midnight Crossing" published in the July 1999 issue of the US Airforce Magazine, says: "US officials are very concerned that a computer failure in Russia's interconnected power grid could cascade through the entire nuclear system and lead to a massive power outage. Such an event could easily end in catastrophe at one of the 65 Soviet-made nuclear reactors." Human error by "an undermanned and unmotivated" (and often unpaid) nuclear work force is increasing "the possibility that a power outage at a nuclear reactor could lead to a catastrophe". Even if the nuclear reactors are managed well, the article says, "loss of power and cooling at the numerous waste pools where atomic fuel rods are kept could cause the water to boil away and permit the release, into the local atmosphere, of lethal levels of radioactivity. Recently loaded rods -- those placed in the waste pools within the past two years -- could begin to melt down within 48 hours of a loss of power". [8] Russian experts are quoted in a July 1999 Enerpresse saying that it is very unlikely that the bug will have serious consequences for Russian nuclear reactors. An official is quoted saying Russia hoped to commence work on remediation "in a couple of weeks". [13] REFERENCES [1] Russian bug threatens cold winter of discontent - Computer Business Review, Apr 1999 [2] Questions linger on energy - Financial Times, Mar 3, 1999 [3] Industry tries to avoid hazardous flare-ups - Financial Times, Jun 22, 1= 999 [4] Oil and Natural Gas: Are They the Real Problems in Y2K? - Jun 21, 1999 http://www.gold- eagle.com/editorials_99/rc062199.html [5] US proposes stockpiling radiation antidote, By Tom Doggett - Reuters WASHINGTON, Jun 18, 1999 [6] Accidental Armageddon - The Age (Australia), Jun 20, 1999 http://www.theage.com.au/daily/ 990620/news/news22.html [7] Diplomats warned off Y2K Russia - Independent, July 4, 1999 [8] Midnight crossing - Airforce Magazine, July 1999 [9] Emergency Diesel Generators: The Weakest Link - Three Mile Island Alert, July 1999 http://www.tmia.com/EDGs.html [10] Update on the IEA's Y2K Activities - International Energy Authority, July 1999 http://www.iea.org/ieay2k/homepage.htm [11] Russia dances to the date bug's tune - Computer Weekly, Aug 5, 1999 [12] Gazprom rejette tout problem lie au bogue de l'an 2000 - Enerpresse, Mar 12, 1999 [13] Le bogue ne devrait pas avoir de consequences graves en Russie - Enerpresse, Jul 6, 1999 [14] Nuclear alert over millennium bug - Observer, Aug 22, 1999 [15] Nuclear plants on alert over computer bug - Independent on Sunday, Aug 22, 1999 [16] It's safe we hope - The Times, Aug 25, 1999 [17] Perspective on the Y2K problem: The sky indeed may be falling - Los Angeles Times, Aug 17, 1999 [18] French nuclear plants threatened by Y2K bug - Financial Times, May 4, 1= 999 [19] Y2K analysis for complex systems of systems: Electric power systems in North America - US Army Report, Jan 1999 http://cr-iiacfs1.army.mil/army-y2k/y2kelectric90224/tsld001.htm ************************************************ Jan Wyllie Trend Monitor "The Information Refinery" 3 Tower Street, Portsmouth Hants. PO1 2JR, UK Tel: 44 (0)1363 881017 Email: mailto:jan@trendmonitor.com Web: http://www.trendmonitor.com "only what you need to know" - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <<...>> CIS: Russia, US defence chiefs to meet Sept 13 - agency Tuesday, 31 Aug 1999 at 01:52am; Category: Overseas News; Low priority; Story No. 9551. CIS: Russia, US defence chiefs to meet Sept 13 - agency RUSSIA US DEFENCE MOSCOW, Aug 30 Reuters - The defence ministers of Russia and the United States will meet in Moscow on September 13 to discuss Kosovo, arms control and other pressing problems, Interfax news agency said today. The Defence Ministry confirmed that Igor Sergeyev would meet his US counterpart William Cohen next month but said a final date had still to be fixed. Interfax, quoting Leonid Ivashov, who heads the Russian Defence Ministry's international cooperation division, said the problems of Russian peacekeepers in Kosovo would top the agenda. Kosovo Albanians have been barring Russian peacekeepers from the town of Orahovac saying they are biased in favour of the Serbs. Washington has urged them to stop their blockade and allow the Russians to carry out their duties. Ivashov said Cohen and Sergeyev would also discuss cooperation on arms control and tackling the millennium computer bug. The Kremlin is still trying to persaude the Communist-dominated parliament to ratify the 1993 START-2 strategic arms reduction treaty and wants to start talks on a START-3 treaty which would impose further cuts in nuclear arsenals. But Moscow is also concerned about US plans to develop an anti-ballistic missile defence shield to protect its own troops and allies in the Far East like Japan against attack from "rogue states" such as North Korea. Russia says such a shield would violate the 1972 anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty which it regards as a central pillar of international arms control. The arms control issue, along with the Kosovo crisis, has soured relations between Moscow and Washington. Russia fiercely opposed NATO's bombing campaign against Yugoslavia but played an active role in mediating between the alliance and Belgrade. REUTER was 31-08 0152 <<...>> Thought you should know about the following report in the Christchurch Press today: "Glitch hits Aust Navy Almost the entire Australian patrol-boat fleet was affected by a satellite navigation glitch akin to the millennium computer bug, the Defence Department said. A Defence spokesman said yesterday that the global positioning systems aboard 14 of the navy's Fremantle class patrol boats failed at the weekend when the calendars on a ring of 24 satellites orbiting the earth were reset." This was one of the preview kick-in dates. In Michael Kraig's oped piece in the March/April issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, he wrote: "These systems may go down earlier than 2000, or they may fail months or years later than the turn of the century. For example, the internal clock of the Global Positioning System will 'roll over' on August 22, 1999, with calamitous results for any GPS user who does not have properly configured satellite receivers." Now, I wonder if this might also have been a contributory cause of the collision in the English Channel in clear calm weather (but at night) between the cruise liner 'Norwegian Dream' and a container ship? Bear in mind that the GPS system is in thousands of ships, fishing boats, yachts etc The next big date is 9/9/99. Best wishes, Rob * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Commander Robert D Green, Royal Navy (Retired) Chair, World Court Project UK Disarmament & Security Centre PO Box 8390 Christchurch Aotearoa/New Zealand Tel/Fax: (+64) 3 348 1353 Email: robwcpuk@chch.planet.org.nz [The DSC is a specialist branch of the NZ Peace Foundation] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #173 *********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.