Statement by Mary Olson
NUCLEAR
WASTE SPECIALIST WITH N.I.R.S.
|
NIRS: Nuclear Information
& Resource Service
1424 16th St NW Suite 404 Washington, DC 20036
tel 202-328-0002 fax 202-462-2183 http://www.nirs.org
In August
1999 the Anti-Nuclear Alliance sponsored Mary Olson to make the
trip to Western Australia to share her knowledge - and her concern
- about the Pangea proposal and the whole issue of nuclear waste.
At a number of packed public meetings she presented a frank appraisal
of the Pangea plan and inspired hundreds of people to do all in
their power to throw Pangea out of town. This essay presents the
essence of her message. |
Click for
larger image
|
Nuclear Information and Resource
Service (NIRS) is a national organization based in Washington, DC, USA,
serving grassroots communities affected by commercial nuclear power
and its radioactive waste. We help over a thousand local groups across
the United States. We also serve as a funding agent for concerned citizens
in reactor communities in Russia and Eastern Europe. We also network
globally on nuclear issues.
Nuclear Information
and Resource Service stands in full support of the people of Australia
in saying NO to the Pangea nuclear waste dump proposal.
It is completely
inappropriate and counter productive to the very real problem of nuclear
waste to even consider an international corporate nuclear waste dump
in Australia.
We will work to fight it, particularly since U.S. corporations are making
this mistake. The Pangea parent corporation is Golder Associates. Golder
has corporate offices at the one and only proposed U.S. high-level nuclear
waste dump, Yucca Mountain.
Golder holds a substantial subcontract under Booz Allen Associates,
a large law firm closely associated with U.S. nuclear utilities. Booz
Allen is currently under contract with the Energy Department to do quality
assurance/contract fulfillment checks on contractor work done at Yucca
Mountain. NIRS has been
a leader of the opposition to the U.S. Department of Energy's proposed
Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.
We oppose Yucca Mountain for a
constellation of reasons, all of which apply to the Pangea proposal.
-
We
oppose Yucca Mountain because it is Western Shoshone Lands.
The Shoshone Nation has a treaty with the US federal government,
and it says nothing about taking the US nation's nuclear waste.
We stand with the Indigenous People of Australia in asserting their
Sovereignty and opposition to a nuclear waste dump on their lands.
-
Yucca
Mountain is a False "solution" to the goal of preventing contamination
of the biosphere with long-lasting nuclear waste. Data shows
that Yucca Mountain will leak nuclear waste into the ground water
and radioactive gases to the atmosphere (the Pangea video also says
that site will leak, but since the underground water moves slowly,
it is "OK"). Settling for a false solution simply opens the door
to further, and increased nuclear waste generation.
-
Transportation
of nuclear waste is a clear risk, with many variables. Contrary
to industry claims, there have been accidents. Even routine transport
exposes many people to both penetrating gamma radiation, neutron
radiation and also many documented cases of surface contamination
of the shipping containers. There is no justification for moving
nuclear waste unless it can be shown that the management of the
material will be significantly better at the destination. Overall
shipping miles must be minimized since accidents are tied most directly
to distance traveled. There is no justification to place people
and lands and waters along shipping routes at risk, simply for corporate
profit. In a Mobile Chernobyl shell game everyone looses, since
the nuclear industry cannot afford any more major accidents.
-
Both
Yucca Mountain and Pangea are turning to super fantastic claims
for waste containers since it has become clear that the geology
of the Yucca Mountain site is not capable of nuclear waste isolation.
At Yucca, there is continuous seismic activity - more than 600 quakes
over 2.5 have happened in the last 20 years within 50 miles of the
site, probably due to a magma pocket below the mountain. There are
25 active fault lines in the area, but it is the smaller fractures
of the rock which make nuclear waste isolation impossible. Claims
that a man-made container will last tens of thousands of years is
also impossible. U.S. DOE says that not a single container will
leak for 1000 years. Containers currently used for waste storage
are so poorly made that many have cracks in less than ten years.
With tens of thousands of containers, certainly more than one mistake
will be made.
In the case
of Pangea it is vital to note that this is a private corporate interest,
standing to make a handsome profit putting forward this proposal.
There
is no such thing as a 40 year nuclear waste dump. This material will
be hazardous for a quarter million years at least. That is 10,000
human generations. Australians are correct to question short term
financial gains in exchange for the longest lasting impact any generation
could have on their lands, waters and future generations.
It is also
completely inappropriate for nations or waste generators to be embracing
an international false "solution" at this time. We do not have an authentic
solution that will work to isolate nuclear waste for as long as it is
a hazard. To allow corporate interests to engage in international nuclear
diplomacy should be recognized for the folly that it is. It is time
for the Australian national government to take a stand with a very strong
NO and prevent any further negotiations, public or private towards an
international nuclear dump.
Mary
Olson, Nuclear Information & Resource Service
|
