Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

by Leave a Comment

U.S. Depleted Uranium to Make Ukraine War Dirtier

By John LaForge

The Biden administration is expected to supply Ukraine with highly controversial depleted-uranium munitions which are to be fired from the Abrams battle tanks the U.S. is sending to Kyiv, the Wall St. Journal reported June 13.

Any delivery of U.S. depleted uranium (DU) weapons to Ukraine would be in addition to the State Department’s Dec. 22, 2022 approval of the sale to Poland of as many as 112,000 heavy 120-millimeter DU shells, which was announced by the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

The British Ministry of Defense announced last March 20 that it too would send depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine  along with its Challenger battle tanks. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov responded at the time charging that sending DU into Ukraine would mean the U.K. was “ready to violate international humanitarian law as in 1999 in Yugoslavia.”  The reference may be to the United Nations Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights which in 2002 labeled the use of DU “inhumane” and a violation of treaties like the Hague Conventions which expressly forbid any use of “poison or poisoned weapons.”

The Wall St. Journal’s understated sub-headline on June 13 warned: “The armor-piercing ammunition has raised concerns over health and environmental effects.” Indeed, between 1997 and 2004, USA Today, the Associated Press, New York Daily News, Life magazine, CNN, and others reported that studies were finding a significantly increased rate of birth abnormalities among children of U.S. Gulf War veterans and among Iraqi children born after 1991. (“DU in UKRAINE – John Pilger & Phil Miller,” Consortium News, May 11, 2023; “Tainted uranium, danger widely distributed,” USA Today, June 25, 2001)

The Journal’s article acknowledged that “The United Nations Environment Program said in a report last year that the [depleted uranium] metal’s ‘chemical toxicity’ presents the greatest potential danger, and ‘it can cause skin irritation, kidney failure, and increase the risks of cancer.’”

However, the paper “balanced” this U.N. warning by quoting John Kirby, a National Security Council coordinator, who reportedly dared to say last March that “studies indicate it isn’t a radioactive threat.” In fact, the most damning reports about the harmful health and environmental effects of exposure to DU contamination come from the U.S. military itself. (See below.)

If the shells are used in the Ukraine war, the soil, water, crops, and livestock of the territory being contested will likely be contaminated with uranium and the other radioactive materials that are in the armor-piercing munitions. This is because when DU smashes through tank armor, it becomes an aerosol of dust or gas-like particles that can be inhaled and carried long distances on the wind.

In 2003, experts at the Pentagon and the United Nations estimated that between 1,000 and 2,000 tonnes of DU were used by U.S.-led forces during their attack on Iraq in March and April that year. That same year, the British Royal Society, declared that hundreds of tons of DU used by Britain and the U.S. against Iraq should be removed to protect the civilian population, contradicting Pentagon claims it was not necessary. (“Scientists Urge Shell Clear-Up to Protect Civilians, Royal Society spells out dangers of depleted uranium,” The Guardian, April 17, 2003)

After NATO’s use of DU weapons in Kosovo in 1999, the Council of Europe called for a world-wide ban on the production, testing, use, and sale of DU weapons, asserting that DU pollution would have “long term effects on health and quality of life in South-East Europe, affecting future generations.” The call went unheeded.

Background

Depleted uranium is uranium hexafluoride or uranium-238, a waste material left from reactor fuel and nuclear warhead production. It is radioactive and a toxic heavy metal, and there are between 560,000 and 700,000 metric tons of this waste stored in the United States. On March 25, 1997 the New York Times reported the volume as 1.25 billion pounds. The military calls DU munitions “armor piercing cartridges” avoiding the taint of the word “uranium.”

In 1991, between 300 and 800 tons of DU munitions were blasted into Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait by U.S. forces. The Pentagon says the U.S. military fired about 10,800 DU rounds — about three tons — into Bosnia in 1994 and 1995. Over 31,000 DU rounds — about ten tons — were shot into Kosovo in 1999 according to NATO. In Iraq, in the number of birth abnormalities skyrocketed following the massive use of DU in the Persian Gulf War. (“EU begins inquiry of veterans’ cancer,” Knight Ridder Newspapers, January 4, 2001) In Plutonium: Deadly Gold of the Nuclear Age (International Physicians Press, 1992), the authors say, “… plutonium is probably the most carcinogenic substance known.”

The U.S. Department of Energy admitted in January 2000 that the metal in DU shells is often contaminated with plutonium, neptunium, and americium, long-lived, highly radioactive isotopes, much more hazardous than DU, or uranium-238. (“Pentagon admits plutonium exposure: NATO shells used radioactive metals,” London, AP, The Capital Times, February 3, 2001; New York Times, February 14, 2001)

While the U.S. military repeatedly declares that its uranium weapons contain uranium-238, and that its DU shells “are less radioactive than natural uranium,” the United Nations Environment Program and others demonstrated that uranium shells used by the U.S. and the U.K. were contaminated with fission products including plutonium. (“DU at Home,” The Nation, April 9, 2001)

Government evidence of harm

* In 2002, the U.S. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute found in a preliminary report that DU produces one-million times as much chromosome damage as would be predicted from its radioactivity alone, and that it causes a form of long-term “delayed reproductive death” of cells. The AFRR institute then canceled the funding of this research.

* In 1997, the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute reportedly found that, “In animal studies, embedded DU, unlike most metals, dissolves and spreads throughout the body depositing in organs like the spleen and the brain, and a pregnant female rat will pass DU along to a developing fetus.”  The Army’s Office of the Surgeon General’s 1993 manual “Depleted Uranium Safety Training” says the expected effects of DU exposure include a possible increase of cancer (lung and bone) and kidney damage. It recommends that the Army “… convene a working group … to identify countermeasures against DU exposure.”

* In 1995, the U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute reported, “The radiation dose to critical organs depends upon the amount of time that depleted uranium resides in the organs. When this value is known or estimated, cancer and hereditary risk estimates can be determined.” Depleted uranium has the potential to generate “significant medical consequences” if it enters the body, the AEPI found.

* In 1990, the Army’s Armaments, Munitions and Chemical Command radiological task group said that depleted uranium is a “low level alpha radiation emitter … linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and] chemical toxicity causing kidney damage.” The group’s report said that “long term effects of low doses [of DU] have been implicated in cancer … there is no dose so low that the probability of effect is zero.”

* In 1984, the Federal Aviation Administration warned its investigators, “If particles are inhaled or ingested, they can be chemically toxic and cause a significant and long-lasting irradiation of internal tissue.”

* In 1979, the U.S. Army Mobility Equipment, Research & Development Command warned, “Not only the people in the immediate vicinity (emergency and fire-fighting personnel) but also people at distances downwind from the fire are faced with potential over exposure to airborne uranium dust.”

Any threatened or actual use of poisonous, gene-busting depleted uranium munitions in Ukraine cannot be considered lawful or ethical and must be condemned unreservedly by civil society on all sides of the Ukraine war.  ###

— John LaForge is a co-director of Nukewatch, a nuclear watchdog group in Wisconsin, and is co-editor with Arianne Peterson of Nuclear Heartland, Revised: A Guide to the 450 Land-Based Missiles of the United States. A version of this was published June 30, 2023 by CounterPunch.org.

 

by Leave a Comment

DOE Targets Marginalized Communities for Frontline Nuclear Work

By Eileen O’Shaughnessy

Attempts are underway to “modernize” the United States nuclear arsenal via increased plutonium pit production at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in northern New Mexico and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The National Nuclear Security Administration claims that aging plutonium pits, the spherical triggers to nuclear weapons, must be replaced as a matter of national security. The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation has pushed back, stating, “Expanded pit production is not necessary to maintain the safety or reliability of the existing U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile and could feed perceptions of a nuclear arms race.”

The physical labor of manufacturing plutonium pits involves frequent exposure to and handling of radioactive and hazardous materials including beryllium, plutonium, and solvents. In order to encourage a new generation of workers to fill the nuclear industry’s most dangerous frontline jobs, including plutonium pit manufacturing, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has partnered with multiple educational institutions to create a “workforce pipeline program” to funnel students into these positions.

Image by Oona Tempest for Kaiser Health News ‘American Diagnosis’ podcast. https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/american-diagnosis-from-church-rock-to-congress-uranium-workers-are-still-fighting-for-compensation/.

In New Mexico, the following institutions of higher education have initiated training programs for frontline nuclear work in their curricula: Santa Fe Community College, Northern New Mexico College, and University of New Mexico Los Alamos. These schools predominantly serve students of color and all have the designation of “Hispanic-Serving Institution.” Northern New Mexico College, located in Española, just adjacent to Los Alamos, has a student body made up of over 90 percent students of color. Three-fourths of students identify as Hispanic and over 10 percent of students identify as Native American. The majority of students are first-generation college students who are drawn from the largely rural population surrounding the 40-mile radius of the campus in Española (Northern New Mexico College website, 2022).

In a December 2022 report released by independent scholars Katherine Shera and Benjamin Bonnet (“DOE Workforce Pipelines in Northern New Mexico”), the scope of the workforce pipeline is laid out in grave detail. The authors point out that workers would be exposed to dangerous chemicals and radionuclides not only in manufacturing, but also in the process of handling, characterizing, and storing the radioactive waste. Frontline workers have a heightened risk of injuries as well as developing chronic illnesses with long latency periods such as leukemias, cancers, and neurological disorders.

It is important to note that students at these northern New Mexico schools are not being targeted for the research and development careers at LANL, which often come with less risk and exposure to toxic materials than technical work. The DOE’s workforce pipeline program is focused on filling technical, subcontractor, and frontline work, which carries a greater level of exposure. Shera and Bonnet note an existing racial stratification of jobs and thus, stratification of risk at LANL. A 2015 LANL report revealed that only about 9 percent of scientists and research and development engineers and 7 percent of postdoctoral positions at LANL identified as Hispanic or Native American, while fully two-thirds of technicians did so (Márquez, 2015). Therefore, the DOE workforce pipeline program is maintaining an existing structure of nuclear colonialism and racial hierarchy whereby communities of color are placed in the most dangerous jobs with the highest risk.

It is important to ask what exactly is being taught to students in these workforce training programs. Are they being given important information about the risks of radiation exposure and contamination, especially for people who are pregnant, and people with uteruses? Are they being given adequate protection as they enter some of the most dangerous jobs in the entire nuclear industry? For targeted marginalized communities, claims of economic opportunity in the name of national security come with a burden of risk and harm that is all too familiar in the deadly legacy of nuclear colonialism.

— Eileen O’Shaughnessy is completing a PhD at the University of New Mexico where she teaches about nuclear issues and is an organizer with the Albuquerque (Tiwa territory)-based grassroots group Demand Nuclear Abolition.

by Leave a Comment

Japan to Delay Ocean Dumping of Contaminated Waste Water from Fukushima

By John LaForge

Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno announced in January that his government would delay its plan to pump over 1.37 million tons of watery radioactive waste into the Pacific Ocean from the devastated six-reactor complex at Fukushima-Daiichi. With the country facing harsh international pressure to cancel the dumping, Matsuno acknowledged “the need to gain public support,” for the plan, the Associated Press reported January 12. The wicked water is now being collected in large tanks that were hastily built near the wrecked reactors.

Fierce criticism of the deliberate pollution scheme has come from China, South Korea, other Pacific Rim countries, scientists, environmental groups, UN human rights experts, and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), an alliance of 17 Pacific island nations. Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida also indicated that the government wants a postponement of the dumping operation — designed by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) — until it is “verifiably safe to do so,” Thomas Heaton reported February 16 for Civil Beat.

The PIF, independent states where according to Reuters up to half of the world’s tuna is sourced, was crucial in forcing Japan’s apparent retreat. The PIF warned that contaminating the Pacific could harm the fishing that its economies depend on. Mary Yamaguchi reported January 12 for the AP: “Some scientists say the impact of long-term, low-dose exposure to tritium and other radionuclides on the environment and humans is still unknown and the release plan should be delayed. They say tritium affects humans more when it is consumed in fish.” A scientific expert panel assembled by the PIF urged reconsideration of the dumping “because it was not supported by data and more information was needed,” Ken Buesseler, with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said in January.

Japan announced in April 2021 that it would allow Tepco to pump the nearly 1.4 million tons of liquid radioactive waste into the public commons of the Pacific Ocean beginning in spring 2023. Tepco says it intends dilute the material and pump it into the sea for the next 30 to 40 years using an underground tunnel now under construction. Media attention has focused on the tritium (radioactive hydrogen) in the waste water which cannot be removed by Tepco’s (failed) filtering system, and has generally ignored mention of the long-lived carbon-14 in the water, which likewise cannot be removed.

Often unreported about the plan is the failure of Tepco’s waste water filer system, dubbed the “Advanced Liquid Processing System,” which has not removed the dozens of long-lived radioactive substances — including ruthenium, cobalt-60, strontium-90, cesium-137, and even plutonium – that the company said it would filter.

The water becomes radioactively contaminated (150 tons more every day) after being poured over hundreds of tons of melted, ferociously radioactive uranium — and in reactor #3 plutonium — fuel, the hot wreckage amassed deep inside the foundations of the three destroyed nuclear reactors, units 1, 2 and 3. All three suffered catastrophic meltdowns following the Great Tohoku Earthquake and tsunami of March 11, 2011. Some of the contaminated waste is groundwater reaches the melted fuel after pouring through cracks in the reactors’ foundations caused by the earthquake. Dr. Buesseler Science magazine in 2020, “Many other isotopes are in those tanks still, and over 70 percent [of 1.37 million tons] would have to be cleaned up further before they might consider even releasing….”

Moreover, reactor 3 which was packed with “mixed oxide” fuel made of combined uranium and plutonium, suffered a huge hydrogen explosion at 11 a.m. on March 14, and Tepco announced that on March 21 and 22, in soil collected on the Fukushima site, plutonium was detected. Hydrogen explosions also caused severe damage to reactors 1 and 2, and to the waste fuel pool of reactor 4. (Three additional hydrogen explosions caused severe damage: to reactor 1 on March 11, and to reactor 2 and to the waste fuel pool of reactor 4 on March 15.)

In April 2021, Cindy Folkers, a radiation and health hazards specialist at Beyond Nuclear in Maryland, told Brett Wilkins of Common Dreams, “TEPCO data show that even twice-through filtration leaves the water 13.7 times more concentrated with hazardous tritium — radioactive hydrogen — than Japan’s allowable standard for ocean dumping, and about one million times higher than the concentration of natural tritium in Earth’s surface waters.”

Secretary Matsuno said in his January statement that the delayed dumping plan “includes enhanced efforts to ensure safety.” This vague reassurance comes from the same authorities that caused the triple meltdown and consequently the worst radioactive contamination of the Pacific Ocean in history; it follows two years of iron-clad declarations from Tepco and government regulators that contaminating the ocean will be safe. The plan to add more radioactive poisons to the Pacific in order to save money has also been approved by the U.S. government and the UN International Atomic Energy Agency. ###

— Used by Counterpunch, March 3, 2023, https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/03/03/japan-to-delay-ocean-dumping-of-contaminated-waste-water-from-fukushima/

 

by Leave a Comment

Fukushima: Novel Fixes Repeatedly Fail, Dumping Threatens Pacific Commons

By John LaForge

 

During the 11-year-long, $57.4 billion partial decontamination efforts at the destroyed Fukushima-Daiichi reactor site in Japan, almost every novel program invented to deal with the complex, unprecedented triple catastrophe has initially failed and then needed to be re-invented. Unworkable schemes instigated to repair, decontaminate, plug-up, or prevent ongoing radioactive contamination, along with cover-ups and corruption by the Tokyo Electric Power Co. which runs the operation, have left the Japanese public wary of the company’s plans and of safety assurances from the government.

Japan’s extensive bull-dozing and mass collection of contaminated topsoil and debris, poisoned by the meltdowns’ radioactive fallout, has filled approximately 20 million one-ton bags. These millions of tons of cesium-contaminated waste are standing outdoors in mountainous stacks scattered across seven states. Some of the heavy bags have been jostled and broken open by torrential rains during typhoons.

Attempts to locate and examine the total of 900 tons of melted reactor fuel (which possibly burned through the wrecked “containments” and foundations of the three units) have failed, because robotic cameras have repeatedly been destroyed by the ferociously hot and radioactive melted wastes. Eleven years after the catastrophe, the condition and location of the melted fuel masses, known as “corium,” is still uncertain because Tepco has yet to develop a robust enough camera.

South Korean fishing boats joined nationwide protests to demand Japan reverse its decision to release contaminated water from its crippled Fukushima nuclear complex into the sea. The banners read “Condemning Japan’s decision to release Fukushima water into the sea.” Photo by Reuters/Kim Hong-Ji

The reactors’ concrete foundations were so severely broken up by the record 9.0 magnitude earthquake, that groundwater rushes through cracks and broken pipes, pours over the three huge masses of corium and becomes highly contaminated with a mix of at least 62 radioactive materials. Tepco’s installation of an expensive “ice wall” that was dug into the ground behind the wrecked reactors, was intended to divert the groundwater keeping it away from the foundations. This fix has also failed.

Tepco has slowed the direct flow of the contaminated water into the Pacific by filtering it and then collecting it in giant tanks. But the tank farm is plagued by leaks and by the discovery that the filter system has failed. In 2018, Tepco admitted that its “Advanced Liquid Processing System” or ALPS had not removed iodine-129, ruthenium-106 and technetium-99, as well as carbon-14, and 60 other long-lived poisons, putting the lie to its repeated assurances that ALPS would remove everything but tritium. The company then promised that it would re-treat the collected water, before dumping all 1.3 million tons of the waste water into the Pacific.

In July, Japan’s nuclear regulator formally approved Tepco’s plan to dump the water into the ocean beginning in spring 2023 and continuing for 30 years. (The reactors produce 140 cubic meters of contaminated water every day, a combination of ground- and rainwater that seeps into the wreckage, and cooling water mechanically poured over the three corium piles.) While independent scientists and environmental historians have charged that dumping would constitute the worst premeditated maritime pollution in recorded history, Tepco’s ocean pollution solution has already been okayed by the government in Tokyo and by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Ocean dumping would violate international law

In August, Tepco announced that it would begin constructing a tunnel to the sea for releasing the waste water. Complaints from scientists, environmental groups and Pacific rim countries, particularly South Korea and China, have not forced Japan to reconsider the plan.

Certain international treaties forbid such deliberate pollution of the global commons. The “Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter,” or London Convention, prohibits any intentional release of radioactive wastes into the sea. Writing in The Korea Times, environmental attorney Duncan Currie and nuclear specialist Shaun Burnie of Greenpeace Germany noted that ocean dumping would also violate the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea by posing a direct threat to the marine environment and the jurisdictional waters of the Korean peninsula.

Tepco says the tritium concentration in the wastewater will be lowered before dumping by diluting it with seawater. However, dilution is basically a public relations scheme since the total amount of radioactive tritium will remain the same. Greenpeace’s Burnie and Currie and others have warned about tritium’s ability to form organically-bound tritium, and that if ingested with seafood the biological power of its beta radiation can damage human DNA.

 

-The Guardian, July 13  & June 29; Hankyoreh, June 9, 2022

by Leave a Comment

Alliances Unite in Fight Against Foreign Fossil Fuel Giant

By Kelly Lundeen
Treaty walker Sherry Couture, Fond du Lac Ojibwe, walks to protect water, honor treaties, and oppose Enbridge tar sands pipelines.
Photo: Indigenous Environmental Network

 

Canadian oil transport company Enbridge has a tough task ahead of it in Wisconsin and Michigan. Keeping their 69-year-old Line 5 pipeline flowing with tar sands requires the approval of two major projects: the reroute of the pipeline around the Bad River Reservation of the Lake Superior Chippewa (Ojibwe), in Wisconsin, and a tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac, the narrow strip of water connecting Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.

Opposition to pipelines has been fueled by growing awareness that climate chaos can be diminished by rejecting coal, oil, and gas projects. Furthermore, the Indigenous-led movement against fossil fuel infrastructure reminds US citizens that it is everyone’s responsibility to uphold Article 6 of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, which states that international law, such as treaties with native nations, takes priority over conflicting state laws.

Sherry Couture spoke at the Treaty People Convergence August 6, which her organization R.I.S.E. Coalition, Nukewatch, and several other groups helped organize through the Wisconsin Building Unity network. “I come from Fond du Lac, the 1854 Treaty territory [of the Lake Superior Chippewa] … I’m known as a Treaty walker … I’ll do anything for the nibi [“water” in Ojibwe]. I’ll live in a ditch. I’ll walk to the Capitol. I’ll sleep on the pipeline. [We] will chase Enbridge down and make sure that they leave our reservation,” she said. The US government violates the Treaty signed with the Fond du Lac by allowing Enbridge’s pipeline to run through the Treaty territory. At the Convergence, on the anniversary of Hiroshima day, Nukewatch linked the issues of the targeting of Indigenous populations and people of color both by nuclear weapons and environmental racism.

Nonviolent action against the Line 5 projects has been ongoing, and Enbridge also faces legal challenges by the Bad River Band and the State of Michigan. In 2013, the Bad River Band refused to renew pipeline easements across their reservation in northern Wisconsin, and in 2019 the Band sued to have the pipeline removed, forcing Enbridge to propose a reroute. On September 7, US District Judge William Conley found Enbridge to be trespassing on the Reservation for nearly a decade, yet didn’t go as far as shutting down the pipeline. Enbridge is working to obtain permits for a reroute while a Final Environmental Impact Statement is being completed. In order to demonstrate union support, Enbridge has already secured project labor agreements with four labor unions and a construction company that was partially owned by Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Tim Michels (when the contract was signed). Enbridge, a foreign company, is on track to spend as much as $1.7 million on US lobbying for a second consecutive year.

A 2010 Enbridge oil spill into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River, the largest inland oil spill in US history, called into question the Line 5 pipeline’s safety, particularly where it runs under the Straits of Mackinac in the Great Lakes, which contain 20% of the world’s freshwater. In 2018, a boat anchor was dragged across the pipeline, causing damage but not a rupture. Even those concerned about energy independence would wonder if putting the Great Lakes at peril is worth the 10% of oil from Line 5 reaching the US market, while 90% returns to Canada. Former Michigan governor Rick Snyder approved Enbridge’s plan to pass the pipeline through a tunnel under the Straits. Enbridge is still hoping to acquire state and local permits.

Nukewatch has supported Indigenous-led objections to both regional Enbridge pipeline projects, Line 3 and Line 5, including Camp Makwa starting in 2017, and a walk supporting Treaty rights last year. This spring Nukewatch organized local events as part of the March Forth to Earth Day actions opposing Line 5, which took place throughout Wisconsin. Pushback against the pipelines will continue in order to protect the water, the Earth, and the people.

What you can do:

• The Army Corps of Engineers is taking comments through October 14 on the proposed tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac for the Environmental Impact Statement scoping process. Participate in a public meeting on October 6, noon Central time, here: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82961743672; or by phone (309) 205-3325 (zoom ID 829 6174 3672).

• Submit comments online with a sample letter here: oilandwaterdontmix.org/submit_army_corps_tunnel_comment.

• See updates at rise-coalition.com, and at communitiesunitedbywater.org.

— Wisconsin Public Radio, Sep. 8, June 8, 2022 & July 20, 2016: GazetteXtra, Apr. 13, 2022; Open Secrets, 2022

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected