Showing posts with label United Kingdom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United Kingdom. Show all posts

06 August 2008

"A Matter of Integrity": Dr. Doug Rokke

"A Matter of Integrity"

War must be considered obsolete. Officials refuse to comply with regulations. Citizens of the world must speak out. The human cost is increasing. Our leaders have abandoned our nation's and the world's citizens.
A matter of integrity

by Doug Rokke, PhD

"YOU ARE GOING TO WAR" - those words echoed through my mind, bringing back memories of my Vietnam experiences, as I sat down in my physics research laboratory at the University of Illinois after receiving a telephone call from the Lieutenant Colonel I worked for in the Army Reserve during November 1990. I knew this would happen after Iraq invaded Kuwait during August 1990. I just did not know when my activation order would arrive. Anyway, on Thanksgiving Day 1990 I would be on my way to war again just as I was on Thanksgiving Day of 1969. Twenty-one years to the day after going to Vietnam for the 2nd time, I was going back to war.

Today, I am a disabled and retired Army Reserve Medical Service Corps officer who specialized in nuclear medicine; and nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare operations (NBC); intelligence; medical operations; and emergency field medicine as a former enlisted combat medic. When Gulf War 1 started during August 1990, I was initially assigned to teach nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare (NBC) operations to 4th US Army personnel. I was finally ordered to active duty and sent to Saudi Arabia with the order "to bring them home alive". That was quite a contrast from my duties during Vietnam as a Bomb Navigation Hard-Hat on B-52's when my job was to ensure weapons systems were optimized to kill. Astonishingly I had deployed to South East Asia on Thanksgiving Day 1969 and then again for Gulf War 1 on Thanksgiving Day 1990. I was sent to Saudi Arabia as the theater health physicist assigned to the 12th Preventive Medicine (P.M.) Command professional staff. The 12th P.M. was in charge of all Preventive Medicine within the combat theater. Basically we were the public health department. I also was assigned to three special operations teams: Bauer's Raiders, the Depleted Uranium Assessment team, and the Captured Equipment team.

Medicalcare for casualties delayed

Today, 17 years since the completion of Desert Storm, with 1994 and 1999 combat actions in the Balkans, and with Gulf War 2 (Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom) ongoing, I am frustrated that the required medical care for "all" (combatants and noncombatants) casualties and environmental remediation of all contamination still is delayed, denied, or for many cases ineffective. As of May 2007 over 408,000 of our nations sons and daughters have applied for lifetime VA medical care and a pension as result of combat-military service related injuries, illnesses, and wounds (www.va.gov "May 2007 GWVIS report). Medical problems (ICD -9 diagnoses) that have been verified in over 300,000 DNBI casualties between FY 2002 and December 31, 2007 (Analysis of VA Health Care Utilization Among US Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) Veterans; Operation Enduring Freedom; Operation Iraqi Freedom; VHA Office of Public Health and Environmental Hazards; VA; January 2008) include: Infectious and Parasitic Diseases, Malignant Neoplasms, Benign Neoplasms, Diseases of Endocrine/Nutritional/Metabolic Systems, Diseases of Blood and Blood Forming Organs, Mental Disorders, Diseases of Nervous System/Sense Organs, Diseases of Circulatory, Disease of Respiratory System, Disease of Digestive System, Diseases of Genitourinary System, Diseases of Skin, Diseases of Musculoskeletal System/Connective System, Symptoms, Signs and Ill Defined Conditions, and Injury/Poisonings. An April 6, 2008 Army Times report written by Kelly Kennedy "Reservists confused about disability benefit eligibility" reveals that too many injured and ill warriors have been given administrative discharges and have not been told that they are eligible for medical disability. Sadly US Air Force Colonel Kenneth Cox verified that Department of Defense medical officials deliberately delayed and denied medical diagnosis of traumatic brain injury ("Colonel: Pentagon delayed brain injury exams"; By Gregg Zoroya - USA Today; Posted: Tuesday Mar 18, 2008 8:08:48 EDT )

Commanders were warned

Since 1991 authors of numerous Department of Defense reports have stated that medical and tactical commanders were unaware of the probable NBC-E (WMD) exposures and never told about the adverse medical and environmental consequences of these exposures. They were told! They were warned! We recommended immediate and long-term medical care. We identified the probable threats and expected adverse health and environmental consequences in written messages and during courses we taught. These courses included the 3rd US Army Medical Command (MEDCOM) & 3rd US Army Central Command (Arcent) Medical Management Of Chemical And Biological Casualties Course ( http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/), the NBC-E Defense Refresher Course, the COMBAT LIFESAVER COURSE, and the Decontamination Procedures Course. We taught these courses to over 1200 persons assigned to individual units and those assigned to the theater command staff between December 1990 and February 1991. I gave the threat briefing specifically identifying the anticipated NBC-E exposures and taught the NBC-E Defense Refresher Course, the Combat Lifesaver Course, and Decontamination Procedures Course between December 1990 and February 25, 1991. We also discussed preventive medicine issues such as food and water borne illnesses, endemic diseases, and hazardous materials exposure issues. Therefore, most unit commanders, medical staff, specified individuals at all levels knew what to expect and how to respond to any given incident!

Uranium munitions still being used

Uranium munitions are still being used during ongoing combat actions causing air, water, soil, and food contamination with consequent adverse health effects even though the United Nations Sub-commission on Human Rights has ruled DU munitions are an illegal weapon. Recently uranium weapons contamination as a result of US Army operations has been confirmed at two locations in Hawaii after initial denials ( http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/08/ap_hawai). During the summer of 1991, the United States military had collected artillery, tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, conventional and unconventional munitions, trucks, etc. at Camp Doha in Kuwait. As result of carelessness this weapons depot caught fire with consequent catastrophic explosions resulting in death, injury, illness and extensive environmental contamination from depleted uranium, conventional explosives, and unconventional munitions. Recently the emirate of Kuwait required the United States Department of Defense to remove the contamination. Consequently, over 6,700 tons of contaminated soil sand and other residue was collected and has been shipped back to the United States for burial by American Ecology at Boise Idaho. When Bob Nichols, an investigative journalist, and I contacted American Ecology we found out that they had absolutely no knowledge of US Army Regulation 700-48, US Army PAM 700-48, US Army Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278, and all of the medical orders dealing with depleted uranium contamination, environmental remediation procedures, safety, and medical care. They had never heard of US Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for dealing with mixed - hazardous waste such as radioactive materials and conventional explosives byproducts. (reference "Approaches for the Remediation of Federal Facility Sites Contaminated with Explosives or Radioactive Wastes", EPA/625/R-93/013, September 1993). The shipment across the ocean, unloading at Longview, Washington State port, transport by rail, and burial in Idaho endangers not only the residents of these areas but poses a significant agricultural threat through introduction of pests, microbes, etc. foreign to our nation.

Contamination in our own backyard

Sadly the known adverse health and environmental hazards from uranium weapons contamination are in our own backyard. The EPA has listed the former Nuclear Metals- Starmet uranium weapons manufacturing site in Concord Ma. On EPA's Superfund National Priority List because it poses a significant risk to public health and the environment. Consequently the community in which our nation was born on April 18, 1775 is now the location of America's own closed dirty bomb factory that will endanger the health and safety of the descendants of our original patriots- "the Minutemen".

Unbelievably, US Department of Defense officials continue to refuse to comply with their own written directives requiring immediate medical care "Medical Management of Army Personnel Exposed to Depleted Uranium (DU)" Headquarters, US Army Medical Command 29 April 2004 and the previous directive "Medical Management of Unusual Depleted Uranium Casualties", DOD, Pentagon, 10/14/93 and still refuse to complete thorough environmental clean up as required by US Army Regulation 700-48, Logistics, "Management of Equipment Contaminated With Depleted Uranium or Radioactive Commodities", Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., 16 September 2002 and Department Of The Army Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278: Guidelines For Safe Response To Handling, Storage, And Transportation Accidents Involving Army Tank Munitions Or Armor Which Contain Depleted Uranium (Headquarters, Department Of The Army, July 1996). Basically United States military personnel have illegally disposed of tons of solid radioactive waste in other nations then ignored the consequences. The primary US Army training manual: STP 21-1-SMCT: Soldiers Manual of Common Tasks states "NOTE: (Depleted uranium) Contamination will make food and water unsafe for consumption." [Task number: 031-503-1017 "RESPOND TO DEPLETED URANIUM/LOW LEVEL RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS (DULLRAM) HAZARDS"]. This acknowledgment indicates that uranium munitions should never be used because food and water contamination will affect all individuals for eternity. The critical fact is that the contaminated food and water can never be made safe for consumption. The toxicity of uranium munitions is also acknowledged by Army leaders. Assistant Army Secretary Walker, in a December 1992 memorandum ordered the Director of the US Army Environmental Policy Institute, AEPI, as mandated by the US Senate, to figure out how to reduce the toxicity of depleted uranium. The AEPI director stated in the final report that "No available technology can significantly change the inherent chemical and radiological toxicity of DU. These are intrinsic properties of uranium." (AEPI Executive Summary, June 1995). A internal Department of Defense briefing conducted by Colonel J. Edgar Wakayama also confirmed the known and serious adverse health and environmental effects ( link to www.traprockpeace.org)

Concerns continue

The continuing concerns regarding known adverse health and environmental effects of depleted uranium, confirmed inadequate preparation of military personnel, and preliminary findings of the AEPI study resulted in the creation of the US Army Depleted Uranium Project. On August 1, 1994 I was recalled to active duty as the Director of the US Army Depleted Uranium Project in response to congressional inquiries and the June 8, 1993 order from the Deputy Secretary of Defense to:

1. Provide adequate training for personnel who may come in contact with depleted uranium equipment.
2. Complete medical testing of personnel exposed to DU contamination during the Persian Gulf War.
3. Develop a plan for DU contaminated equipment recovery during future operations.

The DU project and review of previous research reinforced our original 1991 conclusions and recommendations that:

1. All DU contamination must be physically removed and properly disposed of to prevent future exposures.
2. Specialized radiation detection devices that detect and measure alpha particles, beta articles, x-rays, and gamma rays emissions at appropriate levels from 20 dpm(cpm) up to 100,000 dpm (cpm) and from .1 mrem/ hour to 75 mrem/ hour must be acquired and distributed to all individuals or organizations responsible for medical care and environmental remediation activities involving depleted uranium / uranium 238 and other low level radioactive isotopes that may be present. Standard equipment will not detect contamination.
3. Medical care must be provided to all individuals who did or may have inhaled, ingested, or had wound contamination to detect mobile and sequestered internalized uranium contamination.
4. All individuals who enter, climb on, or work within 25 meters of any contaminated equipment or terrain must wear respiratory and skin protection.
5. Contaminated and damaged equipment or materials should not be recycled to manufacture new materials or equipment.

Since 1991 numerous DOD and VA directives ( http://www.spidersmill.com/gwvrl/) based on the previous directives and then the findings and recommendations of the AEPI study and DU Project have required medical care and environmental clean up. However even though DOD, VA, and UN officials know what should be done, visual evidence, photographic and video tape evidence, on site radiological measurements, personal experience, and published reports verify that:

1. Medical care has not been provided to all DU casualties.
2. Environmental remediation has not been completed.
3. Individuals are not wearing respiratory or skin protection.
4. Contaminated and damaged equipment and materials have been recycled to manufacture new products.
5. Training and education has only been partially implemented.
6. Contamination management procedures have not been distributed and implemented.

The unceasing efforts by senior US Department of Defense, US Army, US Department of Energy, US Department of Veterans Affairs, British, Canadian, Australian, and United Nations officials to prevent acknowledgment of these problems and their refusal to accept responsibility must be stopped. Colonel Robert Cherry, US Army retired and formerly the Pentagon's Senior Radiation Protection officer, has sent out emails stating thatHe [Dr. Rokke] was not the director of the 'US Army depleted uranium project'. No such project with that name ever existed"

This and other lies by senior Department of Defense officials are designed to sustain use of uranium munitions and avoid liability for adverse health and environmental effects by discrediting and destroying any of us who attempt to ensure DOD officials comply with their own existing medical care and environmental remediation requirements.

Officials refuse to comply with regulations

US, Israeli, Australian, Canadian, and British officials have arrogantly refused to comply with their own regulations, orders, and directives that require United States Department of Defense officials to provide prompt and effective medical care to "all" exposed individuals. Reference: Medical Management of Unusual Depleted Uranium Casualties, DOD, Pentagon, 10/14/93, Medical Management of Army personnel Exposed to Depleted Uranium (DU) Headquarters, US Army Medical Command 29 April 2004, and section 2-5 of US Army Regulation 700-48. Sadly after the Israeli use of uranium munitions during their combat actions in Lebanon Israeli officials must also provide medical care to all casualties and clean up all environmental contamination.

United States Department of Defense officials simply refuse to clean up dispersed radioactive Contamination as required by Army Regulation- AR 700-48: "Management of Equipment Contaminated With Depleted Uranium or Radioactive Commodities" (Headquarters, Department Of The Army, Washington, D.C., September 2002) and US Army Technical Bulletin- TB 9-1300-278: "Guidelines For Safe Response To Handling, Storage, And Transportation Accidents Involving Army Tank Munitions Or Armor Which Contain Depleted Uranium" (Headquarters, Department Of The Army, Washington, D.C., JULY 1996). Specifically section 2-4 of United States Army Regulation-AR 700-48 dated September 16, 2002 requires that:

1. "Military personnel 'identify, segregate, isolate, secure, and label all RCE' (radiologically contaminated equipment)."
2. "Procedures to minimize the spread of radioactivity will be implemented as soon as possible."
3. "Radioactive material and waste will not be locally disposed of through burial, submersion, incineration, destruction in place, or abandonment" and
4. "All equipment, to include captured or combat RCE, will be surveyed, packaged, retrograded, decontaminated and released IAW Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278, DA PAM 700-48" (Note: Maximum exposure limits are specified in Appendix F).

Leaders conceal contamination lists

DOD leaders are not showing the congressionally mandated depleted uranium training tapes to military personnel. These three video tapes: (1) "Depleted Uranium Hazard Awareness", (2) "Contaminated and Damaged Equipment Management", and (3) "Operation of the AN/PDR 77 Radiac Set" are essential to understanding the hazards from the use of uranium weapons and management of uranium weapons contamination. DOD leaders must show these tapes to all military personnel involved in the use of uranium weapons and the consequent management of uranium contamination.

The previous and current use of uranium weapons, the release of radioactive components in destroyed US and foreign military equipment, and releases of industrial, medical, research facility radioactive materials have resulted in unacceptable exposures. Therefore, decontamination must be completed as required by US Army Regulation 700-48 and should include releases of all radioactive materials resulting from military operations.

Citizens of the world must speak up

We can not continue to ignore the consequences of depleted uranium weapons use that include adverse health and environmental effects. No person or nation has the right to disperse tons of radioactive toxic waste throughout any other or their own nation then ignore adverse health and environmental effects. There is one question that US, British, and Australian officials refuse to answer. That is: What right do they have to willfully disperse radioactive materials into any nation then refuse to clean the contamination and refuse to provide medical care for all exposed individuals?

Consequently, all citizens of the world must raise a unified voice to force the leaders of those nations that have used depleted uranium munitions to recognize the immoral consequences of their actions and assume responsibility for medical care of all individuals exposed to uranium contamination and the thorough environmental remediation of all uranium contamination left as a result of combat and peacetime actions.

My source of frustration is that today our warnings, requests for medical care, and requests for environmental remediation were and are still ignored!

Why should I or anyone continue to try to obtain medical care and completion of environmental remediation when United States, British, Canadian., Australian, United Nations, and NATO officials do not care because they continue to deny what has occurred to avoid liability for economic and political reasons. Coalition forces applied technology during battle without considering the potential and expected adverse consequences of our actions. The United States shipped WMD agents including anthrax to Iraq, released toxic chemicals during combat actions, used depleted uranium munitions, and now our leaders ignore these facts in order to avoid liability. We have contaminated the earth! Our actions have resulted in and continue to cause serious adverse health and environmental effects!

The personal cost for trying to finish my assigned mission and to make our leaders take care of the troops has been rejection, lost jobs, family turmoil, missing and probably destroyed medical and personnel records, and medical problems. I and hundreds of thousands of other warriors now receive delayed or inadequate medical care. We served our nation and thus earned optimal medical care for service-connected wounds, injuries, and illnesses. But instead, we have been abandoned! We have been raped! I now experience retaliation from Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs officials because I refused to comply with the March 1991 Los Alamos memorandum ( http://www.traprockpeace.org/twomemos.html) to ensure depleted uranium can always be used during US Department of Defense combat or peacetime actions because at the same time a memorandum from an officer at the Defense Nuclear Agency cited serious health effects. But I am not alone. Anyone who demands medical care and environmental remediation faces ongoing and blatant retaliation.

War must be considered obsolete

Today, war must be considered obsolete because we can not deal with either the adverse health or environmental consequences caused by destroying a nation's infrastructure thus releasing toxins that affect all combatants and noncombatants. We can not deal with the adverse health and environmental effects of the weapons we use to destroy the targets - a nation's infrastructure. The human cost of war is staggering. According to the May 2007 VA GWVIS report, at least 407,911 Gulf War 1, Balkans Conflict, Afghanistan, and Gulf War 2 US military combat veterans who are wounded, ill, or injured must fight for the medical care they earned while serving our nation. The most recent US Department of Veterans affairs casualty report: Analysis of VA Health Care Utilization Among US Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) Veterans; Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF); Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF); VHA Office of Public Health and Environmental Hazards; January 2008 reveals that over 299,000 US combat veterans have serious medical problems related to toxic exposures that mirror the same medical problems diagnosed by Operation Desert Storm combat veterans. Sadly, medical care is still ineffective for both groups because the diagnosed medical problems are a result of deliberate United States actions or failure to act. For example, are reporting serious neurological problems. These problems are probably a function of both pesticide exposures, troops wearing flea collars, and uranium toxicity. But, those and other exposures are ignored. Although we have hundreds of thousands of US casualties the actual casualty count also includes hundreds of thousands of noncombatants, primarily children, woman, and the elderly of nations we attacked. Health problems are not limited to US warriors but affect all exposed individuals. World-wide estimates exceed 2 million casualties while over 1,000,000 of America's finest are wounded or ill, thousands have died, including too many of my friends. Consequently, as one of the individuals asked many times to clean up a mess, it is frustrating when United States Department of Defense and United States Department of Veterans Affairs officials do not implement the programs we developed to protect our earth and treat all casualties.

The human cost is increasing

Our nation's sons and daughters answered our nation's call that in too many cases included combat operations that were conducted without justification. Too many have died and continue to die while others who were injured, exposed to toxic compounds, and became sick have been abandoned by our Nation's leaders as has happened throughout history. Sadly the majority of casualties are classified as "disease and non-battle injuries" and are the direct result of our own actions or failures. The human cost is increasing because many got sick and died after they returned home and that number is still increasing at this time. Our leaders knew what happened and is happening! However, these same DOD, DA, VA leaders still keep denying what has occurred and will not implement the programs we designed to resolve the serious health and environmental issues. Numerous orders and military regulations specifying medical care for depleted uranium exposures have been ignored and continue to be ignored. These requirements always will be ignored. This is about avoiding liability for observed adverse health and environmental problems caused by combat and peacetime military actions.

When political correctness and avoiding economic costs are used to determine what medical care is provided, to whom medical care is provided, when care is provided, and what environmental remediation is completed then we, warriors and civilians alike, lose. Our leaders have decided to ignore the problems hoping that they will just go away. Their objective is to avoid liability for adverse health and environmental consequences of their willful actions and war.
Recently, the Department of Defense has instituted the "wounded warrior" program to begin resolution of the serious and lingering delay, denial of, and delivery of ineffective medical care to our nation's ill, wounded, and injured warriors. If our nation's leaders had not abandoned ill, injured, wounded, and deceased warriors resulting from Department of Defense actions since the early days of WW2 (atomic test veterans); Cold War (Project Shad); Vietnam War (Agent Orange); Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom, Enduring Freedom (Depleted uranium, chemical agents, biological agents, immunizations, hazardous materials, pesticides, RF beam weapons, etc.) then we would not have the hidden and abandoned casualties that we have today with a staggering toll. Although the wounded warrior program staff are helping they still refuse to help resolve the fundamental problems - policy decisions to deny and delay prompt and effective medical care, retaliation efforts, and destruction-altering of records.


Our leaders have abandoned our nation's and the world's citizens

Our leaders have abandoned our nation's and the world's citizens and consequently I believe they are ignoring President Lincoln's immortal words spoken during his Gettysburg Address:
"It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain - that this nation, under GOD, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that the government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Today as a combat veteran and patriot; I pray that GOD will answer my and others call for intervention and thus guide our leaders to finally provide the necessary medical care to all casualties and to complete the environmental remediation required to restore our precious resources. I will never cease my efforts to do what is right for GOD and the citizens of the world because this has become "A MATTER OF INTEGRITY". Although I have been a "warrior in battle" today I must be a "warrior for peace".

The three questions that each of us must ask are:

1. When will United States Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs officials acknowledge the adverse health and environmental effects of military operations then provide prompt and effective medical care to all military and civilian casualties?

2. When will they finally clean up all environmental contamination in order to mitigate future adverse health and environmental effects?

3. When will the citizens of the world demand an end to this nightmare and find a way to live together in peace?•

Today, I am retired from the US Army Reserve with a 60% VA disability. My objectives throughout my military career were to research, write procedures, write education and training programs, teach, and evaluate programs to improve combat readiness, complete environmental remediation, and provide medical care for all casualties. I was assigned, accepted, and then completed various dangerous missions.

These included: (1) planning, conducting, and evaluating military medical operations, (2) making sure everyone was prepared for expected use of weapons of mass destruction, (3)cleaning up the hazardous materials and uranium contamination, (4)developing the US Army environmental compliance and education programs, (5) serving as the Depleted Uranium Project Director, (6) serving as Director of the US Army's Edwin R. Bradley Radiological Laboratories, (7) developing, teaching, and evaluating civilian and military emergency WMD response programs, (8) researching and developing the US Department of Defense's environmental remediation and education program for Formerly Used Defense Sites.


Doug Rokke


© 2006, Current Concerns, www.currentconcerns.ch, Phone +41-44-350 65 50, Fax +41-44-350 65 51

homepage: homepage: http://www.mbtranslations.com
address: address: http://www.currentconcerns.ch


27 March 2008

Encore entente cordiale? Print E-mail
By John Busby
Mar/27/2008

The state visit of France's President Sarkozy will culminate in an agreement with Prime Minister Brown to jointly develop a new generation of nuclear power plants and to export the technology to the rest of the world. See Entente Cordiale Sanders Research, August 7th 2006.

The state visit of France's President Sarkozy will culminate in an agreement with Prime Minister Brown to jointly develop a new generation of nuclear power plants and to export the technology to the rest of the world. Concurrently to the meeting in Arsenal's Emirates football stadium Sarkozy is offering to decommission some of his arsenal of nuclear warheads.

The recent UK government consultation on nuclear power has ended with an invitation to the private sector to invest in a replacement fleet of reactors, while putting finance in place "up front" to avoid future decommissioning and waste management liabilities passing to the taxpayer. The designs of three out of four reactor candidates are to be examined by safety inspectors, culminating in the approvals for the new build in 2012. With an anticipated construction period of five years, new nuclear generation would commence at the earliest in 2017.

It now appears that this is not big enough or fast enough for Gordon Brown. His industry minister John Hutton wants more than just replacement and is arguing for a "significantly higher proportion" of nuclear generation than at present.

The competing designs submitted for scrutiny are those of Toshiba (Westinghouse in the US), GE (US), Candu (Canada) and Areva (France). The agency involved in the task has in the past has taken much time and has insisted on modifications for increased safety, which in the case of the Sizewell B station added to the cost and the delay.

Cooperation with France for nuclear power means working with Areva, the station builder and fuel provider, which is 90% French state owned. Already electricity is generated and distributed in Britain by EdF, another French company, 85% state owned. Other potential nuclear generators in the UK include German E.On and RWE, Spanish Iberdrola and the UK's Centrica and would presumably be obliged to purchase an Areva reactor. There seems little point in studying the rival designs, but cutting them out risks infringing anti-competition laws.

It seems that the Brownian "clunking fist" is impatient with the birth pangs of a nuclear "renaissance" unlikely to be financed by the private sector without subsidy and disincentivised by the need to meet waste management obligations "up front". He wants to lay the foundation stone of Sizewell C right now and that means building an Areva station (or two) there without scrutiny or waiting until the prototype being built in Finland has been satisfactorily commissioned.

The Arsenal agreement represents a return to the corporate state – if we ever left it! If EdF is the keenest developer it is because, as a state company, it needs no subsidy and leads to a re-nationalisation of part of the UK electricity industry, albeit by the French state.

The flaw is Areva's declining supply of uranium needed to make the nuclear fuel for its reactors in France, China, Belgium, Finland and others. Half of the US nuclear generation is fuelled from Russian ex-weapons highly enriched uranium diluted to a reactor grade by Rosatom. France supplies some enrichment tails for this program and it may be surmised that Sarkozy is planning to fill the looming gap in France's uranium supplies by sending some of its ex-weapons material to Russia for dilution.

The Entente Cordiale in the football ground concludes the Blair-Chirac agreement in June 2006 (See RRR's "Entente Cordiale?"). The original Entente Cordiale was between Britain and France in 1904, worried about the German navy, but in 1907 it was to become the Triple Entente when Russia joined in to defend Serbia against Austro-Hungarian expansion.

Maybe the Arsenal meeting is not just Encore Entente Cordiale but presages a Triple Entente to keep the lights on in France.

07 January 2008

DU is killing AMERICANS , too, let alone Iraqis (and Afghanis)

BUSH FOUND THOSE WMDS AND USES THEM ON AMERICAN TROOPS IN IRAQ

http://clifylq.livejournal.com/74600.html


WHAT IS DEPLETED URANIUM?

Depleted uranium (DU) is the highly toxic and radioactive byproduct of the uranium enrichment process. "Depleted" uranium is so called because the content of the fissionable U-235 isotope is reduced from 0.7% to 0.2% during the enrichment process. The isotope U-238 makes up over 99% of the content of both natural uranium and depleted uranium. Depleted uranium is roughly 60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium, and has a half life of 4.5 billion years.2 As a result of 50 years of enriching uranium for use in nuclear weapons and reactors, the U.S. has in excess of 1.1 billion pounds of DU waste material.3

In the early 1970s, the government began exploring ways to dispose of DU which would relieve it of the burden of having to store it in low-level radioactive waste repositories. DU has several characteristics which make it attractive for use in munitions: it is extremely dense, available in large quantities, and given for free to arms manufacturers. http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/fahey.htm


http://clifylq.livejournal.com/12979.html

Some of our precious American soldiers have died under "mysterious circumstances" while serving in Iraq. Families are awaiting official answers, which hopefully will be more forthcoming than for the families of Gulf War I veterans who have been labeled as suffering from "Gulf War Syndrome", a condition now believed to be Depleted Uranium Poisoning.

Let us examine these mysterious deaths, then we shall look at what Depleted Uranium is and how it poisons, and finally, we shall examine some current news sources who are already stating that our troops are suffering from Depleted Uranium Poisoning.

MYSTERIOUS ILLNESSES AND DEATH

NEWS BRIEF: "Mystery illness kills Missouri soldier: Josh Neusche died Saturday; his family waits for answers", News-Leader.com, Springfield, Missouri, By Eric Eckert, News-Leader Staff, July 16, 2003, http://www.news-leader.com/today/0716-Mysteryill-108625.html

"Missouri National Guard Spc. Josh Neusche, 20, died Saturday at the Homburg Hospital in Germany from a mysterious illness. A member of the 203rd Engineer Battalion, he is the only Missouri National Guardsman on the Department of Defense's casualty list. Family and friends are awaiting the soldier's body, scheduled to arrive Thursday in the United States. They are also waiting for autopsy results, and his parents, Mark and Cindy Neusche, are calling for an investigation."

"He's always been healthy,' Mark Neusche said ... he's a cross-country runner. There's no reason for a boy of his health to deteriorate so quickly.'Cindy Neusche said her son collapsed July 2 while in Baghdad and was transported to Germany. Doctors there told the family they believed Josh suffered from pneumonia due to fluid that had collected on his lungs. But then his liver, kidneys and muscles started to break down ..."

You can empathize with this grief-stricken family; their son is dead, but did not die from any known combat action. A very healthy 20-year-old man who kept himself in good enough shape to compete as a cross-country runner suddenly collapsed in Baghdad and was flown to a U.S. military hospital in Germany, obviously because the military medical staff in Iraq could not effectively treat him on location.

What could cause his internal organs to just deteriorate and shut down? There may be many explanations, but one certainly does fit: Depleted Uranium Poisoning.

NEWS BRIEF: "Mysterious Diseases Haunt U.S. Troops In Iraq", IslamOnline.net, http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-07/17/article03.shtml, July 18, 2003.

"BAGHDAD, July 17 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – Several mysterious diseases were reported among a number of American troops within the vicinity of Baghdad airport, a military source closely close to NATO unveiled. U.S. soldiers deployed around Baghdad airport started showing symptoms of mysterious fever, itching, scars and dark brown spots on the skin, the source, who refused to be named, said in statements published Thursday, July 17, by the Saudi Al-Watan newspaper. He asserted that three soldiers who suffered these symptoms did not respond to medical treatment in Iraqi hospitals and were flown to Washington for medication. The military source reported a media blackout by U.S. officials to hide such information from the public."

Let us stop right here to digest what we have just heard. American troops are said to be getting sick in the vicinity of the Baghdad airport, the very same place where Josh Neusche suddenly collapsed and died. In this article, we heard that the Neusche is awaiting an official explanation from the military, but in this second article, we read that our command has imposed a "media blackout ... to hide such information from the public." That sounds a lot like the response from our government to the veterans of Gulf War I.

LET US NOW GET BACK TO OUR CURRENT ARTICLE:

"U.S. officials did not come up with an explanation for the symptoms, which NATO experts tend to believe result from direct exposure to powerful nuclear radiations of the sophisticated B-2 bombs used in the war on Iraq, particularly in striking Iraqi Republican Guards forces who deployed to defend the vicinity of Baghdad airport. The military source stressed that the shrouds of secrecy imposed by American officials on the issue were prompted by fears of creating waves of panic and anger among the troops, particularly after announcements that American troops would remain in Iraq indefinitely. He asserted that NATO experts measured levels of radioactive pollution in Iraq and confirmed there were levels of radioactive pollution with destructive impacts on man and environment that may lead to risks suffered by generations to come. On April 25, the British Observer quoted military sources as affirming that depleted uranium shells and bombs used by U.S. and British troops during Iraq invasion were five times more than the number used during 1991 Gulf war."

My military sources indicate that we dropped about 10 times more depleted uranium munitions in this war than in Gulf War I. After all, we delivered a massive bombardment on Baghdad dubbed "Shock and Awe", in which tremendous quantities of munitions were expended. Further, we fought a battle for the Baghdad Airport, and fought pitched battles in the southern part of Iraq. In Gulf War I, we had an extensive air campaign, but a limited "100 hour war" on the ground; it stands to reason we would expend far more munitions this time around.

I asked a military doctor serving in a friendly foreign army if these "mysterious diseases" could be Depleted Uranium. The response I received was both telling and chilling.

"Yes, our troops are definitely dying of depleted uranium, but would probably die eventually if the desert weren't dehydrating them. You see, whenever the dehydration factors in, the blood is more concentrated-so whatever toxins a person is exposed to, the problem accelerates and compounds when the toxins are allowed to concentrate."


As I fully contemplated the terrible reality of this statement, several factors began to sink in:

1. Depleted Uranium poisoning within our troops is hastened by the effects of dehydration. I would think most soldiers in the field in Iraq now are suffering from some degree of dehydration, for they are working in very hot combat suits, heavy gear, and 110+ degree temperatures. In fact, some of our men are working and fighting in 120+ degree temperatures, and many of them are becoming dehydrated, undoubtedly to varying degrees.

2. Therefore, these men are likely to come down really sick much faster than the veterans of Gulf War I, who were pulled out of the theater quickly after fighting a "100 hour war"; for these earlier veterans, their exposure to DU was much more limited, and it has taken the last 12 years for them to either die or come down with the symptoms. Yet, today, 75% of the men who were on the ground in Gulf War I are now either dead, dying or exhibiting symptoms consistent with DU.

3. For these poor soldiers, having now to stay in Iraq, breathing in the DU dust daily, being dehydrated to some degree, they are likely to come down really sick or dead much more quickly and more as a group. In this second article, above, we read that men are coming down with mysterious and troublesome symptoms, i.e., fever, itching, scars and dark brown spots on the skin. These are symptoms of Depleted Uranium poisoning. Therefore, more than a few soldiers are now fighting this mysterious malady.

4. If this is the case, how long will it likely take for our combat units in Iraq now to lose combat efficiency? How long can the US Military Command hide the truth from these men? Once the scuttlebutt begins to spread among our men, will panic and significant loss of morale set in, seriously affecting our combat capability?

Before we can answer these questions, let us study Depleted Uranium briefly.

Depleted Uranium -- Carrying Out Nuclear Warfare On The Land of the Enemy And "Nuking" Your Own Soldiers


http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/du_rokke101005.htm

DEFINITION OF DEPLETED URANIUM -- DU

"Depleted uranium is what is left over when most of the highly radioactive types (isotopes) of uranium are removed for use as nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons. The depleted uranium used in armor-piercing munitions and in enhanced armor protection for some Abrams tanks is also used in civilian industry, primarily for stabilizers in airplanes and boats. Depleted uranium is a heavy metal that is also slightly radioactive. Heavy metals (uranium, lead, tungsten, etc.) have chemical toxicity properties that, in high doses, can cause adverse health effects. Depleted uranium that remains outside the body can not harm you." [Department of Defense, Frequently Asked Questions, Depleted Uranium]

As far as this statement goes, we have no trouble with the facts DOD is setting forth, as it is virtually inert before it is fired off; however, once Depleted Uranium is used in battle, the dangerous contamination begins. This is the essence of this article.

WHY AND HOW DEPLETED URANIUM IS USED BY OUR MILITARY MACHINE

Almost 15 years ago, the Pentagon decided to start using Depleted Uranium extensively in our munitions. Depleted Uranium (DU) was dirt cheap, since it was the left over material from processing Uranium into nuclear weapons and was normally just being thrown away -- in specially built containers in which all handling was done with men wearing special radiation protection suits, because in the commercial field, this stuff is considered "toxic waste"!

Depleted Uranium also possessed several one other characteristic that made it very useful to a modern fighting force. It is extremely dense and pyrophoric, which enables it to punch and burn its way through hard targets such as tanks. Therefore, DU is used extensively in all armor piercing munitions. ["Depleted Uranium: America's Military 'Gift' That Keeps on Giving", By Dan Fahey, L.A. Times, 2/18/01.

DU has proven so effective, the United States is using it also in the following weapons systems:

1. Navy ships carrying Phalanx rapid fire guns are capable of firing thousands of DU rounds per minute. [."DOD Launches Depleted Uranium Training," Linda Kozaryn, American Forces Press Service, 8-13-99]

2. Some Tomahawk missiles launched from U.S. ships and subs are DU-tipped. [."Nukes of the Gulf War," John Shirley, Zess@aol.com. See this article in archives at www.gulfwarvets.com]

3. M1 Abrams tanks are armored with DU, as are British tanks. [BBC News, "US To Use Depleted Uranium," March 18, 2003; U.S. General Accounting Office, Operation Desert Storm: "Early Performance Assessment of Bradley and Abrams," 1-2-92; covered also by Shirley, op. cit]

4. The A-10 "tank buster" aircraft fires DU 30-mm shells at machines and people on the battlefield. [Shirley, op. cit.]

"When a DU shell is fired, it ignites upon impact. Uranium, plus traces of plutonium and americium, vaporize into tiny, ceramic particles of radioactive dust. Once inhaled, uranium oxides lodge in the body and emit radiation indefinitely. A single particle of DU lodged in a lymph node can devastate the entire immune system according to British radiation expert Roger Coghill." ["US Shells Leave Lethal Legacy," Toronto Star, July 31, 1999; also "Radiation Tests for Peacekeepers in the Balkans Exposed to Depleted Uranium," www.telegraph.co.uk, 12-31-02]

As we stated above, Depleted uranium is relatively benign before it is fired. Thus, handlers of these munitions are at little risk until the battle starts. Once munitions containing DU are fired, the risk changes dramatically; when a DU warhead or bullet hits its target, it virtually vaporizes the warhead, as well as much of the target. Most of the warhead becomes either extremely small fragments -- though larger ones are possible -- and a whole lot of radiation dust. Thus, when a person travels through the battlefield, they breathe in the particles that are now lingering in the air, plus they get a lot of radiation on their clothes. Let us hear from an expert on this type of exposure.

"The Royal Society of England published data showing that battlefield soldiers who inhale or swallow high levels of DU can suffer kidney failure within days. ["Depleted Uranium May Stop Kidneys In Days," Rob Edwards, New Scientist.com, 3-12-02; also "Uranium Weapons Too Hot to Handle," Rob Edwards, New Scientist.co.uk, 6-9-99]

Other soldiers that breathe in lesser amounts do not suffer immediately, but have a high chance of breathing in enough to cause serious problems later on. How many of the ground soldiers are contaminated enough with Depleted Uranium residue?

"Any soldier now in Iraq who has not inhaled lethal radioactive dust is not breathing." [Death By Slow Burn - How America Nukes Its Own Troops", Worthington, Amy The Idaho Observer, 4/16/03]

This fact was confirmed to me by phone by my retired Army Major source. In fact, he confirmed the statistics of the Gulf War I veterans, which we review in shortly. Virtually 100% of the ground troops are radiated to a degree that is troublesome; if Gulf War I is any guide, 75% of the men now serving on the ground will develop one or more of the exceedingly serious medical conditions we list below, in the section covering Gulf War I. In fact, the soldiers who come after the fighting troops to occupy and administer the land are the ones who are most affected! This radioactive dust is virtually impossible to clean up because it is so fine and covers everything -- from burned out and wrecked vehicles to houses in the area to the ground on which children may ultimately play. In residential areas like Basra, this consideration is frightening.

Even though much of the fighting did occur in the desert area, the Iraqis tried very hard to not get their vehicles caught in the open area; they preferred to fight in more congested areas, and in residential locations. Further, we were blasting urban targets continuously; as many Americans were cheering the sight of exploding munitions in Baghdad, for example, few realized such munitions were spreading radioactive dust everywhere.

"In the first two weeks of combat, 700 Tomahawks, at a cost of $1.3 million each, blasted Iraqi real estate into radioactive mushroom clouds. ["Navy Seeks Cash for More Tomahawks," David Rennie in Washington, Telegraph Group Limited, 1-4-03, news.telegraph.co.uk]. Millions of DU tank rounds liter the terrain. Cleanup is impossible because there is no place on the planet to put so much contaminated debris [Worthington, op. cit] and such debris is so fine that, by the time it settles, it is just dust indistinguishable from regular dust.

The U.S. military insists that DU on the battlefield is not a problem. Colonel James Naughton of the U.S. Army Material Command recently told the BBC that complaints about DU "had no medical basis." ["US To Use Depleted Uranium," BBC News, 3-18-03].

However, U.S. Army internal writings show that this is simply not true! Listen:

"A 1993 Pentagon document warned that "when soldiers inhale or ingest DU dust they incur a potential increase in cancer risk." ["Depleted Uranium Symptoms Match US Report As Fears Spread," Peter Beaumont, The Observer (UK) 1-14-01]

"A U.S. Army training manual requires anyone who comes within 25 meters of DU-contaminated equipment to wear respiratory and skin protection." ["Iraqi Cancer, Birth Defects Blamed on US Depleted Uranium," Seattle Post- Intelligencer, 11-12-02]

"The U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute admitted: "If DU enters the body, it has the potential to generate significant medical consequences." ["US To Use Depleted Uranium," BBC News, 3-18-03]

In fact, internal communication reveals that, not only does the DOD understand DU long-term health effects, they also understand the disastrous costs the government would incur if they ever admitted the truth.

"The financial implications of long-term disability payments and healthcare costs would be excessive." [US Army Environmental Policy Institute: Health and Environmental Consequences of Depleted Uranium in the U.S. Army, Technical Report, June 1995]

As a matter of fact, if we allow the argument to be carried out solely on the basis of the radioactivity, or the lack thereof, we may be badly understating the problem. A major unstated problem with DU may be its chemical toxicity! Listen:

"In the aftermath of the Gulf War, research on rats conducted by the military's Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute found that depleted uranium's chemical toxicity--not its radioactivity--may cause immune system damage, central nervous system problems and may contribute to the development of certain cancers." [Depleted Uranium: America's Military 'Gift' That Keeps on Giving", By Dan Fahey, L.A. Times, 2/18/01]

What sort of medical problems have others experienced because of an exposure to Depleted Uranium munitions? Listen and cry.

"U.S and British troops deployed to the area are the walking dead. Humans and animals, friends and foes in the fallout zone are destined to a long downhill spiral of chronic illness and disability. Kidney dysfunction, lung damage, bloody stools, extreme fatigue, joint pain, unsteady gait, memory loss and rashes and, ultimately, cancer and premature death await those exposed to DU." [Worthington, op. cit.]

Part of the insidious nature of this DU poisoning is that its effects take a long time to develop; therefore, when a soldier becomes ill 3-10 years later, the Pentagon is primed to deny that the origin of the sickness is this Gulf War. Several years ago, I asked a friend of mine, who is a master mechanic, if he could use his knowledge to damage my car rather than fix it. Even though I knew the answer, his full answer surprised me. He said that, not only could he use his extensive knowledge to damage my car but he could damage it in such a way that the breakdown would occur many, many months later so that I could not directly tie his shop to the damage. This is the principle the DOD is using to deny Gulf War I claims. What gains have come in having the Federal Government pay for medical bills for these veterans has come very slowly, very begrudgingly.


http://clifylq.livejournal.com/50025.html

UNITED NATIONS' DEBATE ON DEPLETED URANIUM HEALTH RISKS

"DU munitions are classified by a United Nations resolution as illegal weapons of mass destruction. Their use breaches all international laws, treaties and conventions forbidding poisoned weapons calculated to cause unnecessary suffering." [Worthington, op. cit]

Since this is true, we should expect Iraq to complain to the United Nations about our use of Depleted Uranium munitions in the 1991 Gulf War -- and they did! Let us review a little bit of the pertinent information.

NEWS BRIEF: "Iraq Charges United States, United Kingdom, With Use of Depleted Uranium in 1991 Gulf War; Also In 'Aggression Against Yugoslavia", United Nations Press Release, DC/2702, 1 May 2000.

"Saeed Hasan (Iraq) said backing away from implementation of the provisions of the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) was symptomatic of an unhealthy international atmosphere ... Those actions ... had also caused damage to Iraq through the continuation of an embargo which which was nothing more than a verifiable genocide being carried out in the name of the United Nations. Iraq demanded compensation for those acts of aggression. The United States and the United Kingdom, both depositories of the NPT and permanent members of the Security Council, had also used depleted uranium in their aggression against Iraq in 1991 and again in their aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999. The 300 tons used against his country had polluted Iraq's environment with radiation and significantly increased the registered cases of cancer, especially among children. The radioactive effects of the depleted uranium would continue for centuries to come unless action was taken to free his country's environment from them."

Thus, Iraq did complain bitterly to the United Nations about our use of Depleted Uranium during the 1991 Gulf War! What is the reference the Iraqi representative made to "an embargo which which was nothing more than a verifiable genocide being carried out in the name of the United Nations."? Iraq had petitioned the U.N. to relax its embargo so they could bring in medicine and equipment that would enable them to combat the effects of the uranium poisoning of their people, and the United States blocked the move!

NOW, LET US RETURN TO THIS UNITED NATIONS PRESS RELEASE:

"He (Iraq's representative) invited the Conference to include in its resolutions a call for a prohibition of the use of depleted uranium for armament purposes. He also invited the Conference to take concrete steps to help Iraq reduce the negative effects of that disaster on the environment and on human life, and affirm Iraq's right to demand compensation for the unjustified use against if of weapons of mass destruction." [Ibid.]

Did you catch the significance of this statement? The Iraqi representative accused the United States of using a Weapon of Mass Destruction against it during the Gulf War? What was that WMD? Depleted Uranium! Iraq said her people were suffering terribly because of their continuous exposure to this uranium. Another news story, written about 8 months after this United Nations Press Release, gives some insight into the condition of the exposed Iraqi citizenry. http://cuttingedge.org/news/n1843.cfm


clifylq
http://clifylq.livejournal.com/



We Are Dieing Now America From Bush's DU
You Will Be Next. Help Us Get Out Of Iraq
http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/du.htm


05 January 2008

Resoures used in the nuclearconsult.com report

REFERENCES

Arthur WB (1989): Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-in
by Historical Events, Economic Journal, No. 99.
Arthur WB (1996): Increasing Returns and the New World of Business,
Harvard Business Review, July-Aug.
Bijker, W (1995): Of Bicycles, Bakelite and Bulbs: toward a theory of
sociotechnical change, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Brown N, Michael M (2003): A sociology of expectations: Retrospecting
prospects and prospecting retrospects, Technology Analysis and Strategic
Management, 15(1) 3-18.
Carbon Trust (2006): Future Marine Energy: Results of the Marine Energy
Challenge: Cost competitiveness and growth of wave and tidal stream energy,
The Carbon Trust, London.
CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (2003): External Costs:
research results on socio-economic damages due to electricity and transport,
Brussels, 2003.
CERRIE (Committee Examining Radiation Risk from Internal Emitters) (2004):
Report of the Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters
(CERRIE), CERRIE, DoH, Defra, London.
CERRIE (Committee Examining Radiation Risk from Internal Emitters) (2004):
CERRIE Minority Report 2004, SOSIUMI Press, Aberystwyth.
CoRWM (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management) (2006): Managing
our Radioactive Waste Safely: CoRWM’s recommendations to government,
CoRWM, November.
CoRWM (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management) (2007): Ethics and
Decision making for Radioactive Waste, February.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(1986): First Report: The Implications of the New Data on the Releases from
Sellafield in the 1950's for the Conclusions of the Report on the Investigation
of the Possible Increased Incidence of Cancer in West Cumbria, HMSO,
London.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(1988): Second Report: Investigation of the Possible Increased Incidence of
Leukaemia in Young People Near the Dounreay Nuclear Establishment,
Caithness, Scotland, HMSO, London.
82
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(1989): Third Report: Report on the Incidence of Childhood Cancer in the
West Berkshire and North Hampshire Area, in Which are Situated the Atomic
Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston and the Royal Ordnance
Factory, Burghfield, HMSO Books, London.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(1994): Fourth Report: The Incidence of Cancer and Leukaemia in Young
People in the Vicinity of the Sellafield Site, West Cumbria: Further Studies
and an Update of the Situation Since the Publication of the Report of the
Black Advisory Group in 1984, DoH, Wetherby.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(1998): Fifth Report: The Incidence of Cancer and Leukaemia in the Area
Around the Former Greenham Common Airbase. An Investigation of a
Possible Association with Measured Environmental Radiation Levels, NRPB,
Oxon.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(1999). Sixth Report. A reconsideration of the possible health implications of
the radioactive particles found in the general environment around the
Dounreay Nuclear Establishment in the light of the work undertaken since
1995 to locate their source. National Radiological Protection Board, March
1999.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(2004). Ninth Report. Advice to Government on the review of radiation risks
from radioactive internal emitters carried out and published by the Committee
Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters (CERRIE). National
Radiological Protection Board, October 2004.
COMARE (Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment)
(2005): Tenth Report. The incidence of childhood cancer around nuclear
installations in Great Britain. Health Protection Agency, June 2005.
Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2007): Energy the Danish way,
http://www.amblondon.um.dk/en/
David et al (1996): Standardisation, Diversity and Learning: strategies for the
coevolution of technology and industrial capacity, International Journal of
Industrial Organization, 14, 181-201, 1996.
David P (1985): Clio and the Economics of QWERTY, American Economic
Review, 75:332-7
Defra and Devolved Administrations (2007) Managing Radioactive Waste
Safely: a framework for implementing geological disposal, public consultation,
June.
83
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) (20030: Energy White Paper: our
energy future - creating a low carbon economy, HMSO, London, March 2003.
Available (16/7/6) at: http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/ energy-policy/energywhite-
paper/page21223.html
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry), Carbon Trust (2004): Renewables
Innovation Review, 2004.
DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) (2006): The Energy Challenge: report
of the UK Government Energy Review, DTI London, July 2006. Available
(16/7/6) at: http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file31890.pdf
Department of Trade and Industry (2007): The Future of Nuclear Power,
Consultation Document, May.
EC (European Community) (2001): Energy Green Paper, Towards a
European Strategy for the Security of Energy Supply, European Commission
2001.
ECRR (European Committee on Radiation Risk) (2003): Health effects of
ionising radiation exposure at low doses for radiation protection purposes,
Regulators Edition, Brussels, 2003.
ECRR (European Committee on Radiation Risk) (2006): Chernobyl 20 Years
On, Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident, Documents of the ECRR, 2006.
Elliott (2007): Supporting Renewables: Feed-in tariffs and quota/trading
systems' in Elliott. D (ed): Sustainable Energy, Palgrave, London.
German Childhood Cancer Registry (GCCR) for Federal Office for Radiation
Protection (2007): Cancer risk for children near German power plants,
http://www.bfs.de/en/bfs/presse/aktuell_press/Studie_Kernkraftwerke.html
Grubb M (1997): Technologies, energy systems and the timing of CO2
emissions abatement: an overview of economic issues, Energy Policy, 25(2),
1997: 159-172.
Hughes T (1983): Networks of Power: electrification in western society 1880-
1930, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Hughes T (1994): Technological Momentum, in M. Smith, L. Marx, Does
Technology Drive History, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1994.
Jackson Consulting (2007) Siting new nuclear power stations: availability and
options for government, Discussion paper for DTI expert group, Jackson
Consulting Limited.
Khadim MA, Marsden SJ, Goodhead DT, Malcomson AM, Folkard M, Prise
KM, Micheal BD (2001): Long-term genomic instability in human lymphocytes
induced by single-particle irradiation, Radiation research, No. 155, pp. 122-6.
84
King D (2006): Why we have no alternative to nuclear power. The
Independent, 13th July 2006.
Landau R, Taylor, Wright (1996): The Mosaic of Economic Growth, Stanford
University Press, Stanford, 1996.
Large J (2006): Decommissioning Nuclear Plants - Openings for the Terrorist
Threat, 10th Global Conference & Exhibition on Decommissioning Nuclear -
Taking Experience Forward, London 20-22 November 2006,
http://www.largeassociates.com/ibc%20decommr/IBCpaperFINAL%2014%20
11%2006.pdf
Large J (2007): Assessments of the Radiological Consequences of Releases
from Existing and Proposed French EPR/PWR Nuclear Power Plants,
February 2007, http://www.largeassociates.com/3150%20Flamanville/r3150-
final-1.pdf
MacDonald (2003): Uranium: Sustainable Resource or Limit to Growth ? Colin
MacDonald, World Nuclear Association Annual Symposium, September 2003
(published in Nuclear Energy Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 99-05, 2004).
MacKerron et al (forthcoming): Climate of Urgency: Empowering Energy
Policy, Palgrave, London, forthcoming 2008.
Misa et al (2003): Modernity and Technology, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Mitchell C (2007): The Political Economy of A Sustainable Energy, Palgrave,
London, 2007.
Mokyr J (1992): The Lever of Riches: technological creativity and economic
progress, Oxford.
MPA (Major Projects Association) (2006): A New Generation of UK Nuclear
Power Plants: are we ready? Institute of Civil Engineers, February 2006.
Morgan WF, Day JP, Kaplan MI, McGee EM , & Limoli CL (1996): Genomic
instability induced by ionising radiation, Radiation Research, Vol. 146, pp.
247-258.
OECD (2004): Uranium 2003: Resources, Production and Demand, a Joint
Report by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic
Energy Agency.
Patterson W (1999): Transforming Electricity, Earthscan, London, 1999
PIU (Performance and Innovation Unit) (2001): Working Paper on Generating
Technologies: Potentials and cost reductions to 2020, UK Cabinet Office,
London, 2001.
85
PIU (2002): The Energy Review, Performance and Innovation Unit, Cabinet
Office, London.
PMSU (Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit) (2002): The Energy Review, UK
Cabinet Office, February. Available (16/7/6) at: http://
www.strategy.gov.uk/downloads/su/energy/TheEnergyReview.pdf
Rosenberg (1982): Inside the Black Box: technology and economics,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982.
Runci, P J (2003): Renewable energy policy in Germany, an overview and
assessment, JGCRI, University of Maryland
http://www.globalchange.umd.edu/energytrends/germany/
Sauter and Watson (2007): Strategies for Deployment of Microgeneration:
implications for social acceptance, Energy Policy, 35(5), pp2770-2779, 2007.
SDC (Sustainable Development Commission) (2006): The Role of Nuclear
Power in a Low Carbon Economy, Sustainable Development Commission,
London, March 2006.
Smith and Stirling (2007): Moving Outside or Inside? Objectification and
Reflexivity in the Governance of Socio-technical systems, Journal of
Environmental Policy and Planning, 8(3-4), September 2007, pp.1-23
Smythe, D. (2007): Consultation Exercise: geological disposal of nuclear
waste, statement to Defra consultation exercise, October.
Soerenson (2000): Renewable Energy, Academic Press, New York, 2000.
Stewart A & Kneale G (2000): A bomb survivors: factors that may lead to a reassessment
of the radiation hazard, International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol
29, pp 708-714.
Stirling A (1997): Limits to the Value of External Costs, Energy Policy,
25(5).517-540
Stirling A (1997b): ‘Multicriteria Mapping: mitigating the problems of
environmental valuation?’, chapter in J. Foster (ed), Valuing Nature:
economics, ethics and environment, Routledge, London, 1997.
Stirling A (2003): Stirling, Risk, Uncertainty and Precaution: some
instrumental implications from the social sciences, in F. Berkhout, M. Leach, I.
Scoones (eds), ‘Negotiating Change’, Elgar, 2003.
Stirling A (2005): Opening Up or Closing Down: analysis, participation and
power in the social appraisal of technology, in M. Leach, I. Scoones, B.
Wynne, ‘Science and citizens: globalization and the challenge of
engagement’, Zed, London, pp.218-231.
86
Stirling A (2007): A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science,
Technology and Society, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 4(15), August
2007, pp.707-719.
Stirling A (2008): Diversity and Sustainable Energy Transitions: multicriteria
diversity analysis of electricity portfolios, chapter for M. Bazilian et al, (eds),
Portfolio-Based Electricity Planning: Enhancing Energy Diversity and Security
– A Tribute to Shimon Awerbuch, Elsevier, forthcoming 2008.
Sundqvist et al (2004): Electric Power Generation: Valuation of Environmental
Costs, in C.J. Cleveland (ed.), Encyclopedia of Energy, Academic Press, San
Diego, 2004.
Sullivan Judgement (2007): The Queen on the Application of Greenpeace Ltd.
Versus Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Judgement, Thursday 15
February given in the High Court of Justice Administrative Division.
UKERC (2007): Final Report on Dti-Defra scenarios and sensitivities, using
the UK Markal and Markal-Macro energy system models, UK Energy
Research Centre/ Policy Studies Institute, London, May 2007.
UNSCEAR (2000): Sources and effects of ionising radiation, Report to the
General Assembly, with scientific annexes, UN, New York.
De Vries et al (2007): Renewable Energy Resources: their global potential for
the first half of the 21st Century at a global level – an integrated approach,
Energy Policy, 35, 2007:2590-2610.
Walker W (2000): Entrapment in Large Technical Systems: institutional
commitment and power relations, Research Policy, 29 (7-8) 833-846.
WEA (World Energy Assessment): (2000): Energy and the Challenge of
Sustainability, United Nations Development Programme, New York, 2000.
WEC (World Energy Council) (1994): New Renewable Energy Resources – a
guide to the future, Kogan Page, London, 1994.
Wicks M (2005): Grasping the Nuclear Nettle, Observer, 4 December.
Winner, 1977 L. Winner, Autonomous Technology: technics out of control as a
theme in political thought, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Yablokov AV (2006): The Chernobyl Catastrophe – 20 years After, a metareview,
in: Chernobyl, 20 Years On, ECRR, 2006.

WEBSITE


Downloadable copies of this report, and further information on the
Energy Review consultation can be found on the website:
nuclearconsult.com

FURTHER READING

Demos (2004): See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move
upstream, Demos, London.
Demos (2005): Start with people: How community organizations put citizens in
the driving seat, Demos, London.
Involve (2005): People and Participation: How to put citizens at the heart of
decision-making, Involve, London.
Involve (2006): The Nanotechnology Engagement Group, Policy Report 1,
Involve, London.
Power Inquiry (2006): Power to the People: The report of Power – an
independent inquiry into Britain’s democracy, The Power Inquiry, York.
Tyndall Centre (2005): De-carbonising the UK: Energy for a climate conscious
future, Tyndall Centre.

26 November 2007

John Shirley writes on depleted uranium poisoning

Nukes of the Gulf War

I wrote one of the first articles about Depleted Uranium poisoning (which applied to civilians and enemy soldiers as much as our own people--or more) a few years back. The issue continues--according to a recent AP story: '... six soldiers who have fallen ill since their return from Iraq said Friday that the Army ignored their complaints about uranium poisoning from U.S. weapons fired during combat. They also said they were denied testing for the radioactive substance. "We were all healthy when we left home. Now, I suffer from headaches, fatigue, dizziness, blood in the urine, unexplained rashes," said Sgt. Jerry Ojeda, 28, who was stationed south of Baghdad with other National Guard members of the 442nd Military Police Company." Sgt. Herbert Reed, 50, said that when a dozen soldiers asked for treatment last fall, they initially were turned away....' Here's my original piece, which applies now to our soldiers in Iraq--and to civilians.

by John Shirley

Concealed nerve gas exposure, medical experimentation on soldiers in the field -- could Gulf War military policy get much worse?

How about routine radiation poisoning?

According to the Military Toxins Project, Depleted Uranium (DU), the radioactive byproduct of the uranium enrichment process, is "roughly 60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium and has a half-life of 4.5 billion years." The United States has in excess of 1.1 billion pounds of DU waste material.

Waste not, want not. In a perverse twist on recycling, the government currently offers this attractively-dense material free to arms manufacturers. Large and small caliber rounds made of depleted uranium were highly effective in piercing Iraqi armor; tanks incorporating depleted uranium into tank armor effectively resisted penetration. Yet while the Army tested the strategic effectiveness of DU, it skated around health and environmental assessments, as the Army Environmental Policy Institute admitted.

Although munitions such as Tomahawk missiles contain DU in their tips, most DU ammunition was fired from USAF tank-killer aircraft and U.S. tanks employing depleted uranium sabot rounds. The Army reports that it fired 14,000 DU tank rounds during the Gulf War. Over ranges up to and exceeding 3 miles, the Army found DU rounds to be "highly effective in penetrating Iraqi tank armor."

The Air Force's A-10 tank-killer aircraft were used extensively against Iraqi armored vehicles and artillery. The A-10s fired 940,000 of these radioactive rounds -- the equivalent of 564,000 pounds of DU.

When a depleted uranium projectile strikes, up to 70% of the DU penetrator is oxidized and scattered as particulates. According to the U.S. Army, this creates "smoke which contains a high concentration of DU particles. These uranium particles can be ingested and are toxic."

Ironically, while DU armor proved effective in shielding tank crews from impacting rounds, the crews were repeatedly irradiated by their own protection. According to the Military Toxins Project, "the amount of radiation a tank driver receives to his head alone will exceed the [Nuclear Regulatory Commission's] annual standard for public whole-body exposure to man-made sources of radiation. Unfortunately U.S. tank crews were not monitored for radiation exposure during the Persian Gulf War."

American troops came into contact with DU through combat, during the recovery of contaminated U.S. vehicles, and while exploring battlefields after cease fire. Some troops assigned to Kuwait are still being exposed today.

Only after most of the fighting subsided did the Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command warn commanders in the Gulf that "any system struck by a DU penetrator can be assumed to be contaminated by DU." Army studies have found that "personnel inside or near vehicles struck by DU penetrators could receive significant internal exposures." Naturally, this didn't deter the military from using the weapons, since the rounds and armor were found to be highly effective. In the long run, thousands of disguisable American and collateral civilian deaths are acceptable trade-offs for short term military-effectiveness statistics, which benefit the Joint Chiefs -- who, after all, are not at risk from exposure.

As of September 1996, most stateside U.S. soldiers still had not been advised of the dangers of handling or working with DU. Although the Department of Defense and Veterans Administration have provided medical exams to more than 85,000 Gulf War veterans with confirmed health problems, only a handful of these veterans have been tested for DU exposure. Many of these have shown elevated levels of DU in their urine several years after the war.

No battlefield cleanup of DU has come about, nor is a cleanup planned. Locals and still-deployed U.S. troops are being exposed to DU on an ongoing basis. DU particles are transported by the wind and water and are presumed to be migrating into food and water supplies. Children routinely play in and around the hulks of irradiated tanks; soldiers brought irradiated souvenirs home from the battlefield.

Some DU ingested through breathing and wounds lodges permanently in bones and tissue, and acts as a chemical and radiological toxin for the remainder of a person's presumably-shortened lifetime. The Military Toxins Project reports that "large numbers of children near contaminated areas have developed leukemias and other health problems" likely associated with exposure to DU.

The customary military foot-dragging has followed calls for studies on the effects of DU exposure, and there are reasons besides the attractiveness of DU devices. The following segment from the Army Environmental Policy Institute report, leaked in late 1995, reveals a more sinister motive: "The potential for health effects from DU exposure is real; however it must be viewed in perspective... the financial implications of long-term disability payments and healthcare costs would be excessive."

DU rounds are being developed for use in the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Vulcan Air Defense Gun and in new combat helicopters. U.S. defense contractors have sold DU weapons to the United Kingdom, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Russia and half a dozen other countries.

No warnings or protective gear for DU were issued before the Gulf War, just as soldiers were not alerted to or protected from nerve gas toxins despite continuous alarms from detection systems. The DU legacy is yet another example of radical irresponsibility toward the well-being of American soldiers and battle-area civilians.

How did it happen? How did we come to subject tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers to nerve gas, with health effects complicated by questionable medical countermeasures which actually worsened toxicity, and now radiation poisoning, all while keeping countless human guinea pigs in the dark? How is the military able to justify these abuses and their cover-ups?

It appears to be policy. And policy has no conscience.



Sources:

"Collateral Damage: How U.S. Troops Were Exposed to Depleted Uranium
During the Persian Gulf War," Dan Fahey, Swords to Plowshares Depleted
Uranium Network of the Military Toxins Project.

U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute: Health and Environmental
Consequences of Depleted Uranium in the U.S. Army, Technical Report,
June 1995.

U.S. General Accounting Office, Operation Desert Storm: "Early
Performance Assessment of Bradley and Abrams," January 2, 1992.

The Nation Magazine, October 21, 1996, "The Pentagon's Radioactive
Bullet" by Bill Mesler.

(c) Copyright 1996 ParaScope, Inc.

* * *

John Shirley is the author of numerous books and many, many short stories. His novels include Crawlers, Demons, In Darkness Waiting, and seminal cyberpunk works City Come A-Walkin', and the A Song Called Youth trilogy of Eclipse, Eclipse Penumbra, and Eclipse Corona. His collections include the Bram Stoker and International Horror Guild award-winning Black Butterflies and Really Really Really Really Weird Stories. He also writes for screen (The Crow) and television. As a musician Shirley has fronted his own bands and written lyrics for Blue Õyster Cult and others.