radioactive 5.docx

8/14/2019 radioactive 5.docx

1/30

back tojumpdoors|radiation|rat haus|Index|Search|tree

This is an HTML-ized copy of the original which exists athttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htm. Thisdocument is part of the The Nuclear Guardianship L ibraryatwww.nonukes.org/ngl.htm,and is reproduced

here with the permission granted at the bottom ofwww.nonukes.org/metatoc.htm.

A Background Briefing on Radioactive Pollution

by Wendy Oser and Molly Young Brown, M.Div.

Abstract:This article explores technical, biomedical, political, psychological, andmoral dimensions of the radioactive pollution problem. It critiques some of thearguments and proposals offered by the nuclear industry. It proposes acomprehensive approach toward creating appropriate global policy, based on

principles of nuclear guardianship, and reports on movement in promisingdirections. Wendy Oser and Molly Young Brown, M.Div., edit and write for the

Nuclear Guardianship Forum and other publications. They can be reached atPlutonium Free Future, P.O. Box 2589, Berkeley CA 94702.

Introduction Radiation and Contamination Biomedical Effects Political and Economic Complexities Waste Storage and Dumping Acceptance of Risk Enormous Costs Psychological Damage Problematic "Solutions" Why Continue Production? Moral Perspective Paradigm Shift Needed Guardianship The Nuclear Guardianship Ethic A Psychoanalyst's Response Facing the Challenge 50 Years At A Time Overcoming Denial Education Promising Proposals Energy Efficiency and Renewables Citizen Participation Conclusion
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/jumpdoors.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/jumpdoors.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/jumpdoors.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/index.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/index.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/index.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rat_haus.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rat_haus.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rat_haus.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/http://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/http://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/http://www.ratical.org/rhrSearch.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrSearch.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrSearch.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/tree.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/tree.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/tree.htmlhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/ngl.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/ngl.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/ngl.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#INTRhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#INTRhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RADIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RADIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#BIOMhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#BIOMhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#POLIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#POLIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WASThttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WASThttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ACCEhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ACCEhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ENORhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ENORhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PSYChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PSYChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PROBhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PROBhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WHYChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WHYChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#MORAhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#MORAhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PARAhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PARAhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GUARhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GUARhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#THENhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#THENhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#APSYhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#APSYhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#FACIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#FACIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#OVERhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#OVERhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#EDUChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#EDUChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PROMhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PROMhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ENERhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ENERhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#CITIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#CITIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#CONChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#CONChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#CONChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#CITIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ENERhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PROMhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#EDUChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#OVERhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#FACIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#APSYhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#THENhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GUARhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PARAhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#MORAhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WHYChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PROBhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#PSYChttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ENORhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#ACCEhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WASThttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#POLIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#BIOMhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RADIhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#INTRhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/ngl.htmhttp://www.nonukes.org/metatoc.htmhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/tree.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrSearch.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/rhrIndex/http://www.ratical.org/rat_haus.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/index.htmlhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/jumpdoors.html


2/30

References

INTRODUCTION

You can't see it. You can't feel it. You can't smell it. It's effects may not show upnow, this decade, this generation, this century. There is no marker on any diseaseor damaged cell saying "I was caused by that particular exposure to radiation." Yetthe radiation of our nuclear legacy will endure for millennia. Our descendants willhave one question to ask of us: What did you do with the stuff?

The scientific, technological, political, and moral challenges presented byradioactive pollution are huge. In the press of war, we learned how to create anduse a nuclear chain reaction. Tragically, we have not learned how to control itshorrific results. We do not know the extent of radioactive contamination nor theextremity of its damage. We do not know how to recall it once radioactivity is letloose. We do not know how to contain forever that which we still possess. We donot know how finally to say "enough is enough" and stop making it, selling it, and

poisoning the planet. These challenges are explored in this article.

Helplessness may overwhelm us in the face of the enormity of the problem and itsendurance through time. We may be broken-hearted in our grief, rageful at whathas been perpetrated in our names, or in denial because our pain is so great. Yet,

for the sake of unborn generations, growing numbers of people are mustering thecourage to overcome the fear and are facing the monstrosity we have created.

At this time the only known protection of life on Earth from an increasing burdenof radioactivity is to immediately abolish the nuclear industry and to monitorconstantly the poison we have created (Makhijani 1994;Nuclear GuardianshipForum 1992). Nuclear guardianship provides a model for how we may responsibly

protect the biosphere from further toxic contamination into the future.

RADIATION AND CONTAMINATION

An element is radioactive when it has an unstable nucleus that spontaneouslyreleases energy (or decays). The particles emitted in the process, in the form ofalpha or beta particles, neutrons, and gamma rays, affect other atoms, causing themto become unstable emitters of radioactivity themselves, with the potential tocontaminate whatever they are near.

The nuclear chain consists of human activities that begin with disturbing natural

radioactive uranium deep in the earth, and includes every stage of mining, milling,transporting, enriching, fabricating, processing, and so-called disposal. Every link
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#REFEhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#REFEhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#REFE


3/30

in this chain results in contamination of the biosphere. As wind and water,microbes, insects, seeds, birds, and other life forms move through all ecosystems(including those identified as too contaminated to be inhabitable by humans),unconfined radioactivity eventually disperses through the biosphere worldwide.

Radioactive particles move through the air in the form of dust from both themining of uranium and the wind moving over the tailings-mountains of uranium-laced earth left on the ground after three to 4% of uranium is removed for

processing. Extracting the usable uranium contaminates the equipment used, theliquid that washes it, the vehicles that transport it, the clothing of the workers, thewater they wash with, and the air with the radioactive gases that are routinelyvented. Contamination continues at every step along the way without end; in thereactors, the submarines, the weapons manufacturing, stockpiling, storage, testing,use, and dismantling.

Accidents can happen at any reactor or in transport of radioactive materials.Nuclear reactors have been described as "accidents waiting to happen" (Roy1993;Thomas, Greensfelder, and Akino 1996). Of course, some accidents havealready happened.

Released radioactive gases and materials and structures left without effective on-going containment have let loose into the biosphere unknown amounts ofradioactivity. Regions where the concentration of such abandoned radioactivity has

been greatest from mining, accidents, spills, explosions, weapons fabrication,

testing, dumping of wastes, etc., have been designated as "sacrifice zones":Chernobyl and Chelyabinsk in Russia, Hanford, Washington, Bikini Island in thePacific, to name a few.

Whether through naivete or misplaced priorities, by plan or by accident, thedevelopment of nuclear technology has been accompanied by gross as well asminute releases of radioactivity into the atmosphere, the soil, the oceans, seas, andwater table, showing up worldwide in animal, vegetable, and inert matter.Radiation crosses species and concentrates through the food chain, subjecting otheranimals and humans to its damaging effects.

BIOMEDICAL EFFECTS

The greatest threat of radioactivity to life as we know it is damage to the gene pool,the genetic make-up of all living species. Genetic damage from radiation exposureis cumulative over lifetimes and generations.

Some biomedical effects of radiation are well known. If the exposure is great

enough, as it was for 200,000 people in Japan in 1945 and for the clean-up crew inChernobyl, death can occur immediately or within days.
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93


4/30

Even low-dose exposures are carcinogenic after extended exposure (Gofman1990). The current generation, the one in utero, and all that follow may suffercancers, immune system damage, leukemias, miscarriages, stillbirths, deformities,and fertility problems. While many of these health problems are on the rise,

individuals cannot prove either increase in "background" radiation or specificexposure as the cause. Only epidemiological evidence is scientifically acceptableto impute cause. Perhaps the most extreme outcome over time would be simply thewholesale cessation of the ability to reproduce. Radiation is a known cause ofsterility (Gofman 1981).

The quality of life of vast numbers of us may be affected by the increased burdenof radioactivity we all bear. Many victims of radiation sickness do not show up inthe statistics because the kind of symptoms experienced, while disabling, are not assignificant as childhood leukemia, or stillbirths, or cancer, or birth defects.

Nevertheless, lives of countless people have been affected by radiation exposure.

Beyond the physiological effects, the mental and emotional consequences of thetrauma of exposure to invisible environmental contaminants in general, andradioactivity in particular, has been documented (Vyner 1988). One can onlyspeculate about the spiritual consequences (Schell 1982;Lynch 1995).

"Background radiation" is a measurement of the accumulated radioactivity in theatmosphere from all sources combined: the sun, the earth, and all man-madeexplosions, leaks, accidents, purposeful ventings, and dumpings. The term,

however, implies naturally occurring radiation is of no real concern. But before theAtomic Age there were no comprehensive measurements of naturally occurringradiation, so the use of this term obscures the reality that we already live in acontaminated world, and that radiation's effects are cumulative and irreversible.

With respect to nuclear pollution (and every other type of persistent pollutantwhich lacks a safe dose), it cannot be overemphasized: What counts biologically isthe sum of all the injuries over time from all the combined sources and eventswhich release persistent poisons (radioactive or other) into the biosphere. If thesum matters biologically, then each contribution to the sum matters (Gofman andO'Connor 1994).

POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC COMPLEXITIES

Complicating our knowledge of and response to the problems of radioactivecontamination and its consequences are political and economic complexities.

Nuclear technology was initially developed for its destructive capacity and itsterrifying threat. The discoveries were also fueled by the excited curiosity of the

scientists themselves. Following the first use of atomic energy as weapons on the
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vyn88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vyn88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vyn88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lyn95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lyn95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lyn95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vyn88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90


5/30

people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a worldwide movement arose in horror or hopeto limit its use to peaceful purposes. (As a child in the late 1940s, one of theauthors joined in gathering signatures for "Atoms for Peace.")

The nuclear industry has since spent vast amounts of money to make nuclearpower acceptable to citizens; propaganda campaigns advertise nuclear power as asource of electricity "too cheap to meter," "green and clean," and a necessity in theface of the increasing demand for power (Hilgartner 1982). At the same time theindustry has kept secret the intricate and inexorable labyrinth of problems thatunfold at every stage of its operations.

While the promoters of nuclear power itself would argue otherwise, the authors,along with many other observers, assert that there is only one nuclear industry, thatcommercial nuclear power would not exist if it were not needed to justify military

use (Taylor 1996;Thomas, Greensfelder, and Akino 1996).

All of the more than 400 nuclear power plants now operating in 32 countriesproduce large quantities of plutonium that, when chemically separated from spent(used) fuel rods, can be used to make reliable, efficient nuclear weapons of alltypes. Irradiated fuel rods, when not regarded as waste, are seen as a resource foruse in breeder reactors (to produce more plutonium), or for direct conversion intoweapons. Until we phase out all nuclear power world-wide, we continue to support"latent proliferation" of nuclear weapons, since any government acquiring nuclearreactors for energy production may change its mind about nuclear weapons (or be

replaced by one that does), or may secretly prepare nuclear explosives ready forassembly and use (Feiverson 1977). Moreover, alarmingly large quantities ofuranium and plutonium can no longer be legally accounted for, either throughrecord-keeping errors, careless handling, or theft. Only when we stop regardingradioactive material as a resource and more accurately categorize it as thedangerously toxic substance it is, can we hope to limit the escalatingcontamination.

A legacy of the military roots of nuclear technology is the secrecy that hascontinued to shroud the nuclear industry. Even non-weapons nuclear research tendsto remain classified in the U.S. National Laboratories at Los Alamos andLivermore, in part, because any discoveries may have weapons applications, and,in part, because a cultural norm of secrecy has developed over the years. (One ofthe authors grew up in Los Alamos; when recently touring Livermore Lab, shediscovered how conditioned she was against raising challenging issues.) In the

press of war, hot and cold, politics overruled and suppressed what scientists knewthen of the dangers of radiation (May 1990). Although, since the end of the ColdWar, policy shifts in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the former SovietUnion have allowed some increase in access to information, most citizens know

little about the extent or the effects of radioactive pollution, and the issue is largelyavoided by the press. In much of the nuclear world, governmental censorship
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hil82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hil82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hil82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tay96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tay96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tay96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Fei77http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Fei77http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Fei77http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#May90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#May90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#May90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#May90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Fei77http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tay96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hil82


6/30

continues to keep citizens ignorant of the threat from both military and commercialoperations.

With the development of solar, wind, and other clean energy sources, nuclearenergy cannot compete in terms of efficiency or economics. According to a BritishParliamentary study, nuclear power produces a volume of greenhouse gases secondonly to coal (Eichelberg 1994)when mining, transportation and fuel reprocessingare included, even before waste contamination and monitoring are factored in.

Nevertheless, nuclear technology is being aggressively sold to developing nationswithout revealing known environmental, economic and political consequences (orviable alternatives).

Because of their huge financial investments, multinational corporations andgovernments continue efforts to expand the nuclear chain (read: add to the burden

of radioactivity). Although no new nuclear power reactors have been ordered in theU.S. since 1973, the same technology that is no longer seen as safe or profitableenough in the U.S. continues to be globalized and promoted by U.S., Canadian,European, and now Asian nuclear industries (Thomas, Greensfelder, and Akino1996). Countries with small or modest energy output, particularly in Asia, areunder tremendous pressure to accept the pitch of the multinational corporationsmarketing nuclear power. Threats have reportedly been made regarding favoredtrade status and economic failure in the capitalist marketplace to nations reluctantto take the nuclear option (Eichelberg 1994).

WASTE STORAGE AND DUMPING

Millions of tons of lethal radioactive waste have accumulated (D'Arrigo 1986). Anumber of possibilities have been considered for dealing with what is not alreadyloose in the environment. These possibilities are not necessarily based on acommitment to keep the material from mixing with the biosphere over the time

period necessary to render it benign. Ten to 20 half-lives may be required for mostradioactive material to reach levels that are indistinguishable from original

background, "half-life" referring to the time it takes for a particular radioactiveelement to give off half its radiation. Twenty half-lives or more generally willapply to highly concentrated wastes such a those from nuclear power plants(Nuclear Information and Research Service 1996). For comparison with historicand geologic time, uranium-239 will remain radioactive into the future for as longas our solar system has been here; technetium-99 and uranium-234 for as longhomo erectus has been around; and plutonium-239 for longer than our species hashad burial rituals or musical instruments (Nuclear Guardianship Project 1994a).

Referring to the nuclear materials as "waste" products to be "disposed of," whenthey will remain radioactivity toxic for up into the millions of years, is
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#DAr86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#DAr86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#DAr86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94


7/30

oxymoronic. These are concepts we deal with every day: we flush our bodilywastes down the toilet and dispose of our garbage in bags and cans that are truckedoff to be dumped somewhere out of sight. We can forget about it. Or so we, in theindustrialized world, have been lead to believe. No doubt the pernicious, pervasive

"out-of-sight, out-of-mind" premise is discussed elsewhere in this issue ofInternational Issues. The "waste" and "disposal" vocabulary create the impressionthat, being no longer useful, they can be dumped and abandoned. And, in fact, thatis precisely what has happened to much of the nuclear industry's leftovers(Caufield 1989).

The weapons branch of the worldwide industry has repeatedly disregarded theenvironmental consequences of dumping. Radioactive liquids have been dumpedinto the ground and waters at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, contaminating theground water and the Columbia River. Lake Karachi, in Russia, by the

Chelyabinsk complex is so toxic with abandoned radiation that to stand next to itonly a few minutes would provide a lethal human dose of radiation, and the waterlevel is dropping, reaching toward the ground water. Sellafield, in England, nowand in its former life as Windsacale, pipes radioactive waste a mile into the IrishSea. This is the state of radioactive waste disposal in the 20th century.

Regarding the stuff not yet abandoned, official policies vary around the world inpart because the materials have been classified more in the interest of those whobear liability than in the interest of future generations. In the U.S. this has resultedin categories primarily determined by one regulating commission for so-called

commercial waste, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and another, theDOE, for that of the military (Young 1994).

"High level" wastes, which include the euphemistically named spent fuel fromcommercial reactors, "need to be set aside not because their vigor is drained ortheir fever cooled but because these poisonous materials have become tooirradiated for further use" (Erikson 1994). Deep underground burial is the disposalmethod currently proposed. The problems with putting the waste undergroundinclude that changing water tables, earthquakes, and other geological factors will

eventually disturb the buried waste and lead to contamination of soil, water, and air(Thomas, Greensfelder, and Akino 1996). No scientist or engineer can give anabsolute guarantee that radioactive waste will not someday leak in dangerousquantities from even the best repositories. Nor can we be confident that ourdescendants will not dig into the burial sites hundreds or thousands of years fromnow, out of curiosity (Peaslee 1993)or lack of information.

Military reprocessing wastes are also called high level. They are currently destinedfor deep geological burial inside Yucca Mountain, Nevada. This is tantamount toabandonment. Material which will continue to emit radioactivity for as long as

240,000 to half a million years will be sealed in underground caves that havedemonstrated salt water seepage in their first five years. We simply do not know
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Cau89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Cau89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Cau89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#You94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#You94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#You94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#You94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Cau89


8/30

how to make containment materials that will outlast the radioactivity (Hamilton1996).

Commercial producers of nuclear materials in the U.S. were initially heldresponsible for their unusable leftovers. Creation and management of dumps werecontracted out by the utilities and military producers to waste managementcompanies, who proceeded to put the stuff in unlined shallow trenches from whereit has leaked into the soil and water. Suits for damages followed because ofmismanagement and leakage. Five of the six commercial nuclear waste landfillsare currently leaking. Four of those leaking have been managed by U.S. Ecology,the only company still being considered to manage the dump planned in theCalifornia desert at Ward Valley. All other firms have withdrawn their bidding dueto insoluble liability issues. No other low-level dumps are proposed at this time.The NRC's unilateral emergency-access power to direct waste from any state to the

Ward Valley site would make this site a national repository. The Ward Valley planincludes shifting financial liability from the producers to the tax payers (Goitein,Klasky, and Young 1996).

The siting of new waste dumps, long opposed by local public interest groups, hasbeen identified by the American Nuclear Society as a necessary precondition forany new construction of nuclear power plants (Eichelberg 1994).

The "low-level" waste stream from nuclear utilities, (including the extremely long-lived plutonium leached from the irradiated fuel rods) accounts for 99% of the

radioactivity, measured in curies, shipped to burial grounds (Hamilton 1994). Anargument put forth to justify the need for these shallow dumps is the disposition ofradioactive isotopes used in medical diagnosis and treatment. The short half-livesof most medical radionuclides (hours, days, weeks) enable them to be stored onsite until the material has decayed to undetectable levels (and, in fact, most are)(Hamilton 1994). Only 1% of the "low-level" radioactive waste stream is generated

by research and medical wastes.

Also perplexing is the argument of military, or security, necessity for geologicalburial of radioactive wastes. To those who conclude that serviceable storage sitescould be targeted in war, there is less "risk" involved in choosing deep burial. "Theobjection that accessible storage sites would be vulnerable to terrorist attack is oneI frequently encounter, especially among advocates of nuclear power," commentsJoanna Macy (1994a). "I suspect that it is a 'red herring,' because if this concernwere sincere, it would be seen to apply right now to every nuclear establishment,from fuel assembly plants to operating reactors, since any one of them would causewidespread disaster if bombed." Every nation that has nuclear power is a potentialnuclear weapons state (Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1995). Anynuclear materials, including those unaccounted for, could be the basis of terroristic

threat or activity. The nuclear industry is silent about this.
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ham96


9/30

Along with generating waste, nuclear industry seems also to generate largeamounts of muddled thinking. Japan, the nation that suffered 200,000 killedimmediately by the use of atomic weapons, has begun a "breeder" (of plutonium)reactor program which, if fully carried out, will result in the largest stockpiling of

plutonium in the world. And the U. S., the only nation to have used nuclear poweras weapons, has told the world that it is the most trustworthy nation to protect theworld's stockpile of plutonium (Tanahashi 1996).

ACCEPTANCE OF RISK

The nuclear industry is researching peoples' willingness to accept risk. It is knownthat people feel safer driving a car than riding in an airplane, even though drivingis more risky. The industry is attempting to offer that same illusion of control withregard to nuclear power. They bank on the hope that the public can be convincedthat the benefits of electrical production outweigh concerns about safety and waste(Eichelberg 1994).

In the first five decades of the nuclear age, international recommendations foracceptable levels of worker exposure to radiation have been revised downward anumber of times (from 30 centisievert per year to the whole body in 1934 to 15 in1950, five in 1956, and two in 1990) (International Commission on RadiologicalProtection 1991). The dangers of exposure to low-level radiation have been

historically underestimated. A 1989 NRC committee concluded that a given doseof radiation is four times likelier to cause leukemia than was thought ten years ago(Lenssen 1991). Existing human studies show that every dose of ionizing radiationconfers a risk of carcinogenic injury (Bertell 1986;Gofman 1981). A growingnumber of specialists in the field today assert that there is no safe level of radiationexposure. "Safe" means free from risk of injury, and existing human studies showthat every dose of ionizing radiation confers a risk of carcinogenic injury, the sizeof a radiation risk being tied to the amount of the accumulated dose (Gofman1994).

Addressing the issue of how harm from toxins has managed to escalate, Gofmanand O'Connor have put forth the Law of Concentrated Benefit Over Diffuse Injury:"A small, determined group, working energetically for its own narrow interests,can almost always impose an injustice upon a vastly larger group, provided that thelarger group believes that the injury is 'hypothetical' or trivial or distant-in-the-future, or real-but-small relative to the real-and-large cost of preventing it" (1994).The essence of the axiom is triviality. Triumph for each injustice is virtuallyassured if the advocates succeed in presenting it as trivial. Even when new injuriesor injustices truly are small, the aggregate abuse can accumulate to tragic

proportions after the axiom of Concentrated Benefit has operated again and againand again.
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tan96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tan96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tan96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ber86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ber86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ber86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#GoO94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof81http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ber86http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eic94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tan96


10/30

Since the refusal of the American public to expand nuclear power, there has been ashift in government sponsored research away from learning more about thedamaging effects of radioactivity. Instead grants are being given to proposalsaimed at demonstrating that some radioactivity is beneficial to life. The DOE has

been described as wishing to sell the public the following beliefs:

a. a little radiation is good for you (hormesis);b. there a threshold dose of radiation below which no harm at all

occurs;

c. a dose of radiation is far less harmful if it is received slowly overtime, than if the same dose is received all at once.

"Since 1980, the false claim that radiation received over time is two to ten timesless harmful than in a single dose is invoked to reduce the cancers attributed to theatomic bomb by a factor of up to ten and is applied to predictions about the slowdoses from Chernobyl" (Gofman1990,1994).

ENORMOUS COSTS

A definitive study of the accumulated costs of the U.S. nuclear power, FiscalFission: The Economic Failure of Nuclear Power (Komanoff and Roelofs 1992)revealed half-a-trillion dollars as a conservative figure for resources spent through1990. Excluded costs, such as health effects of radiation, accidents, adequateinsurance, could well total another $375 billion. These figures do not include thealmost certain escalation in future waste and decommissioning costs.

The U.S. has just passed legislation, S 1936, that will result in transportingradioactive materials to centralized repositories, putting more than 50 million

people in the U.S. at risk of high-level nuclear waste transport accidents.Taxpayers will pay for any accident damages, not the nuclear industry whichgenerated the waste, nor the carrier transporting it. Few realize the extent of

taxpayer liability. DOE intends to privatize the transport, while also indemnifyingthe carriers (Nuclear Information and Research Service 1996).

A move to increase DOE's budget for the radioactive waste program will onlymake sense when the commitment is also made to an orderly and economic phase-out of waste.

"Nobody at the time thought it would become such a disaster. Nobody here couldeven envisage that it could develop into such a tragedy. The truth was hidden

because officials did not want to spend the billions of rubles it will take to cure this

wound" (Drach 1991).
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Kom92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Kom92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Kom92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NIR96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Kom92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gof90


11/30

PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE

An aspect of nuclear pollution that has not been widely discussed is the

psychological damage to the world's population, collectively and individually.Knowing that, because of the presence of nuclear materials, our planet, our home,our selves could be irreparably destroyed at any moment, impairs our ability toengage in meaningful, successful, protective strategies (Lifton 1979;Erikson1994).

This psychological terrorism has been abated only superficially by the end of theCold War. While some weapons are being dismantled, their plutonium pits are

being stockpiled. We do not know how to make them harmless. How to makenuclear bombs is information that is publicly available. While reprocessed

plutonium is the ingredient of choice in "high-tech designer" bombs, modestamounts of either plutonium or enriched uranium are sufficient to create "crude"nuclear weapons. In addition, every presence of nuclear materials, whether incivilian reactors, mine tailings, reprocessed plutonium, or so-called waste anddumped materials has the potential to be used in terrorist threats or acts ofdestruction (military or otherwise). This potential, whether or not carried out,constitutes an ongoing psychological assault upon the human family.

PROBLEMATIC "SOLUTIONS"

Humanity's vast body of scientific knowledge pales before the challenge ofisolating nuclear waste until it is harmless eons hence. For less than a centuryscientists have been exploring the nature of the atom and radioactivity, and duringonly a fraction of that time have they begun to consider how to protect life from itsharm.

Many ideas for "final disposal" have been put forward in addition to geologic

abandonment but none have proven even remotely adequate. Each technical fixexplored, including some already enacted, contains major flaws. Vitrification,radioactive wastes solidified in molten glass to reduce its movement, generatesexplosive and flammable gases and very hot radioactive sludge (Makhijani 1994).The process is vulnerable to accidents and was found to be 30 times moreexpensive than the option of storing materials on site (Roy 1993), and it renders theradioactive materials permanently inaccessible for application of future knowledge.Encasement in, or combining with, cement is being researched (Roy 1993),although no encasing material will outlast the radioactivity, which itself causes thecement to become embrittled, to crack and crumble. Proposals for transmuting the

so-called waste materials would produce additional radioactivity materials, whichare looked upon as further resources for economic reasons, thus continuing the
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lif79http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lif79http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lif79http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lif79


12/30

nuclear chain and its enduring pollution (Fuller 1992;Thomas, Greensfelder, andAkino 1996). In addition transmutation requires great amounts of energy andchemical processing, creates new, massive quantities of waste, and radioactivewaste problems will remain in any case (Makhijani 1994). Breeder reactors have

been rejected by most nations that explored them because of their danger and thenecessity for repeatedly transporting highly poisonous plutonium and producingmore of that substance which, as previously noted, is uniquely valuable forweapons manufacture. Japan alone is continuing to develop its breeder program,against the rising voice of protest from its citizens. "By industry estimates,reprocessing multiplies the quantities of wastes requiring long-term isolationnearly ten-fold" (Lenssen 1991).

There are seminal ideas that capture the imagination as possibilities for the near orfar future. Just this summer a primitive microbe was identified as a new form of

life, offering possible new sources of renewable, nonpolluting natural gas and forcleaning toxic heavy metal waste. It belongs to the class of one-celled organisms,archaea, which can withstand radiation in doses rated at two million rads - where450 rads would be fatal to any human (San Francisco Chronicle1996).

Thought has been given to blasting radioactivity materials under the ocean floor orinto the sun. The seabed idea is stopped by the same issues that prohibit deep

burial in the earth: we cannot predict with certainty a stable geologic future for therequired time spans. On the contrary, Earth changes geologically and biologically,and sooner or later the radiation will disperse.

Erikson (1994) suggests that, instead of saying "any methodology that claimsprecision in the anticipation of repository consequences must be viewed withappropriate caution," the DOE should flatly declare "any methodology that claims

precision in that regard must be regarded as ridiculous."

While the sun could easily absorb the addition of our manufactured radioactivity,we lack the precision to ensure accident-free transport of the materials to CapeCanaveral, let alone an accident-proof launch. Writer Anne Herbert put it this way:"Nuclear accidents are made by fools like me, but only God could make a nuclearreactor that's 93 million miles from the nearest elementary school" (1994).

WHY CONTINUE PRODUCTION?

There is no solution. It is not known how to detoxify a radioactive particle, exceptby letting it spend itself through time, during which it will continue to contaminateand damage all life forms with which it comes in contact. How, then, shall we

proceed?
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ful92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ful92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ful92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#SFC96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#SFC96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#SFC96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#SFC96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Her94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Her94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Her94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Her94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#SFC96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Len91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mak94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tho96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Ful92


13/30

The Chernobyl catastrophe was the final argument, according to Gorbachev. Atthat point "all of us understood the kind of monster we had created" (1994). TheUkrainian poet and playwright Ivan Drach said, "For the first time we understandwhat sovereignty means, what democracy means, what freedom means. The

Ukraine has been sacrificed. This nation, which possesses thousands of years ofhistory, is now on its knees, its radioactive knees. This is not drama; this is tragedy.But the most important thing is the children. Without healthy children, we have nofuture" (1991).

Why have we not simply ceased production? How is it we have accepted thecontinued production of radioactive toxins and the stockpiling and dumping oftheir wastes?

To begin with, world power is still measured in terms of plutonium, the "deadly

gold of the Nuclear Age" (International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear Warand the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research 1993). Holding veto

power on the United Nations Security Council are the five nations who haveatomic bomb capability. "The question is: Which would be preferred by mosthuman beings-a world in which possession and threatened use of nuclear weaponsis allowed for some but forbidden for others, or one in which they are completelyoutlawed, with no exceptions?" (Taylor 1996) Non-nuclear states are afraid of

being left out of the "nuclear Mafia."

Moreover, the centralized nature of an energy industry based on nuclear power

plants makes it very attractive to multinational investment. If a country can beconvinced to commit to nuclear power as its major energy source, the controllingcorporation is almost guaranteed years of profit. Moreover, the nuclear industryhas managed to convince governments to underwrite much of the developmentalcosts, plus the costs of "disposing" of wastes, freeing the corporations from thisdaunting concern. As more and more millions are invested in the industry, it

becomes more and more difficult to reverse the commitment.

MORAL PERSPECTIVE

Perhaps our pain and horror at the destructive power of the split atom, our failureto see the effect of greed brought on by a materialistic value of life, and our fearand sense of helplessness living under the power of the military/industrial complexhave all resulted in mass denial. "It should have been clear that our ignoring, ordenial, of the devastating accumulation of the nuclear arsenal and nuclear wastewas pathology and deeply connected therefore to the ways we lead our lives" (Haas1992).
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gor94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gor94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tay96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Haa92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Haa92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Haa92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Haa92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Haa92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Tay96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Int93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Dra91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gor94


14/30

Thus we have tolerated the practice of human sacrifice, one of the unacknowledgedcosts of having a nuclear industry. Representatives of indigenous peoples fromaround the world have reported on the suffering and devastation inflicted on them

by our nuclear activities (World Uranium Hearings 1992). Their testimony is an

appalling indictment of nuclear colonialism.

For it is their homelands, their bodies and their ancient cultures that are mostimmediately victimized by nuclear power and nuclear weapons. On their land 70%of the world's uranium is mined (Native American lands, [former] Sovietminorities, recently independent Namibians), most of the testing takes place(Nevada, Bikini and Eniwetok, Tahiti, Maralinga, Central Asia), and radioactivewaste is dumped (Prairie Islands Sioux in Minnesota, Tibet). These crimes arecompounded, in virtually every case by secrecy and deception and intimidation onthe part of industry and government (Macy 1993).

PARADIGM SHIFT NEEDED

Is there, perhaps, some shift happening, allowing us the courage to face thisheretofore overwhelming challenge? If this is so, it must come from, among otherroutes, a willingness to take on the moral and ethical aspects of the challenge, andto develop new ways of thinking from far broader and longer perspectives.

"The world that we have made as a result of the level of thinking we have donethus far creates problems that we cannot solve at the same level at which wecreated them." (Albert Einstein)

"One must care about a world one will never see." (Bertrand Russell)

"The greatest revolution in our generation is the discovery that human beings bychanging the inner attitudes of their minds can change the outer aspects of theirlives." (William James)

"Because our nuclear legacy impacts the well-being of future generations, we mustconsider their rights when we plan for the disposition of radioactive materials.Because of the endurance of long-lived radiation and its cumulative damage, wemust come to understand our place in "deep time" ." (Macy 1991b).

Citizen groups and a few government organizations around the world have begunto address these issues, including Cousteau Society, Greenpeace, Nuclear FreeZone movement, Nuclear Guardianship Project, Nuclear Information and ResourceService, Don't Waste America, Women's Nuclear Free Network, WorldInformation Service on Energy, and local groups everywhere there are nuclear

materials.
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92


15/30

GUARDIANSHIP

Of these groups we give particular emphasis in this article to the work of Nuclear

Guardianship Project (NGP), as that has been a focus of the authors' own citizen-involvement since its inception in 1988, and because of the importance of its focuson the integration of ethical issues with political and technical decisions.

NGP developed out of a citizens' study group addressing the issue of responsiblecare of nuclear waste. The group was initially drawn together by Dr. Joanna Macy,a scholar of general systems theory, Buddhism, and environmental ethics, andincluded a cosmological physicist, a poet, a cultural anthropologist, a nuclearengineer, a citizen-diplomat, educators, artists, and psychologists, a number ofwhom suffered from damaged immune system diseases possibly attributable toradiation exposure.

The group members educated themselves through teaching and reading, contactwith experts and organizations, visits to sites and with the people living near andworking at them, and through acts of imagination projecting themselves into pastand future time. Ideas evolved through these experiences, and the followingstatement of principles emerged:

Nuclear Guardianship is a citizen commitment to present and future generations to

keep radioactive materials out of the biosphere. Recognizing the extreme damagethese materials inflict on all life-forms and their genetic codes, NuclearGuardianship requires

a. interim containment of radioactive materials in accessible, monitoredstorage, so that leaks can be repaired, and future technologies forreducing and containing their radioactivity can be applied;

b. stringent limits on transport of radioactive materials, to avoidcontaminating new sites, and to minimize spills and accidents;

c. cessation of the production of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy;and

d. transmission to future generations of the knowledge necessary fortheir self-protection and the ongoing guardianship through time(Nuclear Guardianship Project 1992).

The group tried to identify with its descendants, to intuit what they will want fromus 50 years, 500 years, a 1000 years from now. We imagined their interest in our

politics, our inventions, and our art will pale before their questions: "What did you
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP92


16/30


17/30

9. The formation of policies governing the management of radioactivematerials requires full participation of the public. Free circulation ofinformation and open communication are indispensable for the self-

protection of present and future generations.

10.The vigilance necessary for ongoing containment of radioactivematerials requires a moral commitment. This commitment is withinour capacity, and can be developed and sustained by drawing on thecultural and spiritual resources of our human heritage. The NuclearGuardianship Ethic is proposed as an evolving expression of values toguide decision-making on the management of radioactive materials.

A PSYCHOANALYST'S RESPONSE

Psychoanalyst Thea Bauriedl (1992) concluded that the idea of nuclearguardianship incorporates thinking that could lead to solving some of today's mostdifficult problems. By not attempting the "final solution" of burying life-threatening waste, we afford future generations a better opportunity to deal withthe poisonous material. By storing the waste where we can keep an eye on it, wekeep the danger, and the guilt it generates, from being suppressed. "The real perillies in ignoring these dangers."

Bauriedl points to the implication of guardianship that to protect the nextgenerations we must explicitly bequeath them the unresolved dangers of ournuclear waste production. As we simply are unable to free them from theconsequences of our mistakes, we are at least not ignoring them, and they will havea chance to create viable strategies for their safety.

Guardianship recognizes the dangers of human arrogance, and allows us to becomeaware of the responsibility each parent generation holds for its children. Storagesites for toxic materials are to be places of contemplation to which everyone hasaccess, where the intention is to remain aware of the necessity to protect the

surrounding environment.

Places with the greatest potential for destruction the world has ever known acquire,in this way, a certain spiritual significance. All the great religions remind us that

besides recognizing and accepting our mistakes, the path of freedom lies in owningour own failings, rather than projecting them onto others. This re-owning is not anexcuse for past [or future] mistakes, but is humanizing and leads to compassion forourselves and others.

Many scientists and technicians believe their work has nothing to do with

mythology. They are mistaken: they, especially, live in the delusion that they cancontrol nature. Through the guardianship concept, this myth can be called into
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92


18/30

question. We need new myths and new symbols to help us protect our lives andthose of future generations (Bauriedl 1992).

She concludes that the basic acts of nuclear guardianship-ceasing production of theradioactive toxins and collectively maintaining them-are psychologically healing

by bringing us together to bear the responsibility for what we have created.

Researchers may find uniquely valuable data to use by "listening" in a new wayand to new subjects. "Our very lives might depend on this listening. After theChernobyl nuclear accident, the wind told the story that was being suppressed bythe [leaders]. It gave away the truth. It carried the story of danger to othercountries. It was a poet, a prophet, a scientist" (Hogan 1991).

FACING THE CHALLENGE 50 YEARS AT A TIME

It is nearly inconceivable to consider being responsible into the future for tens orhundreds of thousands years. So arbitrary numbers have been chosen because oftheir economic, political, technical, or psychological implications, e.g., 100 yearsfor monitoring shallow burial dumps, or 10,000 years to anticipate needing tocommunicate deep burial to our descendants (Erikson 1994).

Communicating with the unknown distant future was the mission of architects,

anthropologists, materials scientists, and linguists convened by the DOE toconsider long-term warning markers for a centralized disposal site, the WasteIsolation Pilot Project, New Mexico (Peaslee 1993). The project was posited on theassumption that human culture could suffer some rupture in the future, and,therefore, knowledge might not be passed on culturally.

Our wish to decide now-once and for all--how to "dispose" of the stuff reflects ourlack of faith in the future. Yet, the rate of technological innovation promises to beinfinitely more rapid in years to come than it has been in years past (Erikson 1994).

In her article "Fifty Years at a Time," Molly Young Brown (1994) explores anapproach that is more psychologically manageable and would make it possible forfuture generation to apply their own ingenuity to the problem.

If we understand ourselves to be conduits of life and culture between the past andthe future, we will find our responsibility less overwhelming. We can addressourselves to keeping nuclear materials out of the biosphere for the next 50 years orso, storing it so that the material and our knowledge about it remain accessible toour grandchildren. They in turn will carry this responsibility forward, according tothe wisdom and values of their time.
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hog91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hog91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hog91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pea93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Hog91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bau92


19/30

"Fifty years at a time" reminds us of the "one day at a time" slogan for recoveringaddicts. It keeps one focused on the present task, within the context of a lifetime ofrecovery. And perhaps that is what we must now do as a culture: recover from ouraddiction to nuclear energy and its underlying dream of unlimited power over

nature and one another.

We in the industrialized world have pursued such a dream of dominance forcenturies, trying to assert control over the natural processes of life, and over eachother. Our enchantment with nuclear energy-and the toxic mess we have wrought-reflects the larger pattern of human alienation from nature and destruction of theenvironment. Like protecting the rainforests, keeping air and water clean,

preserving biodiversity, and all the other ecological concerns we have today,nuclear guardianship requires that we radically change our relationship to the

biosphere. Instead of "power-over," we must learn "power-with," as we take our

place in the vast, complex, interdependent web of life on Earth.

Nuclear guardianship is not more or less important than any of the othertransformational tasks we humans face today. This and everything else needs tohappen. To work on one task is to work on them all. Addressing the socialinjustices that lead to warfare and terrorist attacks, for example, will help create astable social order within which guardianship can endure. We must learn to actsustainably in all aspects of our collective life, providing at least minimal food,clothing, shelter, and dignity for everyone, or radioactive contamination will beonly one of many contributors to the collapse of our habitat.

Nuclear guardianship can be a training ground for this transformation of humanconsciousness. Through guardianship, we learn to sustain the gaze, to keep ourattention on the reality before us, overcoming the temptation to deny or escape theresponsibility. We affirm our commitment to the future, doing what we can now toassure the continuity of human life and evolution, and then faithfully passing thetask along to our descendants.

Because of the vast eons of time involved in the radioactive decay of plutonium,nuclear guardianship keeps us humble. We realize that haste is our greatest enemy,for precipitous decisions made now may prove irrevocably disastrous, even withinthe next few years. Guardianship trains us to think in terms of the whole: the wholeof humanity, the whole of the ecosphere, the whole of time.

OVERCOMING DENIAL

A number of activities around the world are moving toward overcoming the denialthat has surrounded the nuclear legacy and our responsibility for it. Some that

include education and organizing for specific changes are the Nuclear Free Zone


20/30

movement, Abolition 2000, the Campaign for a Plutonium Free World, and thesuccessful World Court Project.

Some projects directed to remembering the past and connecting with the futurehave combined contemplation, aesthetics, location, and information. Participantson the Atomic Mirror Pilgrimage traced the geographic links of the nuclear chain,

journeying from uranium mines to test sites to Hiroshima. For 17 years the NevadaDesert Experience, organized by an ecumenical community, has held annual vigilsat the Nevada Test Site. Artists, such as Barbara Donachy, Mayumi Oda, andKazuaki Tanahashi, are influencing awareness through their works, rituals, andinstallations, while others do so with photographic documentation (Goin 1991;DelTredici 1987). Several films have given vivid imagery to what is at stake(Testimony 1983; The Day After 1983), as well as numerous documentaries andmedia reports (Video Project 1995). "Wake-up" books have been published

addressing psychological spiritual, ethical questions raised for the present andfuture (Ruggiero and Sahulka 1996;Macy1983,1991b;Glendenning 1989;Posner1990;Schell 1982)and giving relevant personal testimony (Griffin 1992;Williams1991;Glendenning 1994). Some universities have established environmental ethicsdepartments. Individuals (Seed, Macy, et al. 1988;Macy1983,1991a,1991b;Cole1992) and organizations (Institute for Deep Ecology Education; Center forEcoliteracy; Interhelp) are exploring deep ecology and ecopsychology.

Mainstream media increasingly report on nuclear events, from governmentalhorrors of the past to the unsolvable waste situation. TheNew York Times

Magazine devoted its cover and a 12-page article (Erikson 1994) to radioactivewaste, urging patience. Noting that "nuclear waste buried in haste will still bedeadly in 12001 A.D.," Erikson warned, "we dare not act as though as know," andurged the government to "relax its insistence on immediate and irreversible burialand turn to forms of storage that allow both continuous monitoring and retrieval."

NGP has developed a slide show presentation of an imaginative journey to anuclear guardian site of the future. Through images, music, and narration, audiencemembers envision how people at guardianship sites might keep accurate

knowledge of our nuclear legacy alive, continue research,, and maintaincontainment of the radioactive materials. Vital to the presentation is the suggestionthat these people in the future would feel gratitude that we, in the late 20th century,remembered them, calling on the wisdom traditions of our human heritage and our

profound caring for life across time, thus allowing them to participate in protectingthemselves from the enduring "poison fire" (Nuclear Guardianship Project 1989).Such positive future images are needed to balance anger, despair, helplessness, andother potentially incapacitating responses, and to free human energy for creatively,committedly facing the horror (Macy 1983;Glendenning 1989).
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Del87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Del87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Del87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Del87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vid95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vid95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vid95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Rug96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Rug96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Rug96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pos90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pos90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pos90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pos90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gri92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gri92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gri92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Wil91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Wil91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Wil91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Wil91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#See88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#See88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#See88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Col92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Col92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Col92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Col92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#NGP89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Eri94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Col92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Col92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#See88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle94http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Wil91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Wil91http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gri92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sch82http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pos90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Pos90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Gle89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac91bhttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac83http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Rug96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Vid95http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Del87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Del87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Goi91


21/30

EDUCATION

The general public has been woefully uninformed about radioactive materials, theirbiomedical effects, whether they can be safely stored, transported or used, andwhere the materials are located. Research is conducted primarily by vestedinterests within the nuclear industry, with little information made available to the

public. Moreover, information has been hidden by governments in the name of"national security." As citizens inform themselves, they will influence theirgovernments to pass legislation limiting production and transportation andsafeguarding already produced radioactive materials.

People have the right to know about the slow, cumulative poisoning that is takingplace in us all, and also to information about ways we can protect ourselves. Thereis no panacea, but there is information about what makes cells less, or more,

vulnerable, to radiation damage (Lee 1990;Radiation Protection Home Page1996). Diet for the Atomic Age (Shannon 1987), for example, details and justifieshuman dietary recommendation to help minimize radiation absorbed and detoxifyradiation poisoning (e.g., eat low on the food-chain where radiation and othertoxins are less concentrated). Such knowledge may make a difference in howincapacitated we or our children become from radiation exposure.

All this education and resultant action will only "occur in a context of a radicalshift in our collective consciousness, away from materialism and greed towardreverence for all life. Creative imagination is needed, both to devise strategies, and

to motivate us with the images of those [beings of the future] for whom we worktoday" (Brown 1992).

Through the concepts and contributions of environmental justice, deep ecology,and epidemiology, many people are moving away from an anthropocentric belief,which views nonhuman living species as inferior to humans, with less inherentright to exist. An "ecocentric" perspective views humans as an intrinsic part ofnature, with a unique role and responsibility within the evolution of life on this

planet. "We [humans] alone are capable of holding a truly broad world view thatrepresents the whole of nature and includes all possible points of view in additionto our own. We can-and must-gain enough perspective to see ourselves as one partof a much greater living system, or being, and learn to act accordingly" (Sahtouris1989).

PROMISING PROPOSALS

What are the essential requirements of a responsible global policy on the care ofradioactive materials? "Don't make it. Don't move it. Don't bury it. Don't forget it."

(Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety 1988).
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lee90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lee90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lee90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RPH96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RPH96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RPH96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RPH96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sha87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sha87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sah89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sah89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sah89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sah89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Con88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Con88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Con88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Con88http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sah89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sah89http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Bro92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Sha87http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RPH96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#RPH96http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Lee90


22/30

Growing numbers of non-governmental organizations are making proposalsregarding the responsible care of nuclear materials (Coalition on West Valley

Nuclear Wastes, Greenpeace, Nuclear Guardianship Project, Nuclear Informationand Research Service, Plutonium Free Future). They all recognize that safe storage

of nuclear materials cannot be guaranteed. Even the best designed facilities willleak someday. Officials obscure that fact by proposing new sites for the waste withthe implication that moving the waste will resolve the problem (Mongerson 1990).

Nuclear reactors themselves remain radioactive, long after decommissioning. Theyare de facto waste facilities already. Citizens are beginning to reject the "not-in-my-backyard" stance, accepting the burden of responsibility. Mongerson, livingnear a reactor, says it "is not a question of fairness to ask the people who livearound the waste generators to bear more risk than the rest of us... Those of us wholive at these existing facilities are just stuck with a raw deal" (1990). Her local

citizens' group agreed that moved waste should not be placed in new sites butshould go to existing facilities.

When we stop generating radioactive waste, the accumulation of these wastes willstop. Members of existing nuclear communities would continue to be employed asthe reactors were decommissioned. Those who work with radiation and seek tocontain it are already, in a sense, guardians (Macy 1994a).

The Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Waste (1990)subscribes to a plan of actionspecifying that generators must retain title to, responsibility for, and possession of

the waste they have made. An independent policing system to assure generatorcompliance, [inter]national criteria and regulations are essential. Incineration,redefinition as "below regulatory concern," or dilution to disperse the dose over alarger population must not be allowed. Reparation and recovery plans must bedeveloped for the residents and workers in areas where nuclear activity has taken

place (World Uranium Hearings 1992).

Dr. Rustom Roy, a leading researcher in nuclear waste, recommends that we storenuclear waste in packaging "on the ground at military research and production siteswhere it was produced. Likewise, on-site storage of civilian fuel rods is the way togo for at least the next 50 years. We already have 500 huge, highly radioactiveholes in the Nevada Test Site. These can never be moved, changed, or cleaned up.But one of them could take an enormous amount of grouted radioactive defensewaste, making both safer" (1993). The goal in radioactive waste management must

be to isolate human-made radioactive materials from the environment for theirentire hazardous life.

Nuclear Information and Resources Service has created a proposal for storage-for-decay:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Coa90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Coa90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Coa90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Roy93http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#WUH92http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Coa90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mac94ahttp://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90http://www.ratical.org/radiation/BBradPollution.html#Mon90


23/30

The material must decay to radioactive levels indistinguishable from (not inaddition to) original background, as determined by using appropriate samplingtechniques and the best available, appropriate detection instrumentation properlycalibrated and set at the most sensitive setting. The general rule is that 10 to 20

half-lives is the hazardous life of radioactive materials. In some cases, dependingupon the original amount of radioactivity in the material, 20 or more half-lives maybe required for the material to reach levels that are indistinguishable from originalbackground. The need for 20 half-lives or more generally will apply to highlyconcentrated wastes, such as those from nuclear power plants, and not to medicalwaste (1995).

Radioactivity can be measured on a number of scales: mass of the radioactivematerials, amount of radiation given off, kind of radiation (alpha and beta particles,neutrons, or gamma waves), or the half-life of the radioactive isotopes. The choice

of scale may depend on which arguments are being made (Young 1994). Long-term environmental safety should be the main concern of all nuclear policy.Guidelines for a uniform glo

radioactive 5.docx

Documents