http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/12173/story.htm
|
FEATURE - Nuclear waste recyclers target consumer products
|
|
USA:
August 28, 2001 |
|
|
|
The Department of Energy
(DOE) sees the recycling as a way to clean up waste at decommissioned nuclear
plants and weapons facilities, but environmental groups call the idea
ridiculous. "It's hard to
imagine a nuclear enterprise more tone deaf to public concerns or a more
cockamamie scheme than taking radioactive waste and disposing of it in
consumer products," said Dan Hirsch, president of nuclear watchdog group
Committee to Bridge the Gap. The energy department
will spend the next 12 months to 18 months studying the environmental and
health risks of the plan, having held 12 public hearings in six cities this
summer, said DOE spokesman Joe Davis, Critics say recycling
radioactive waste, even at low levels, is reckless. But energy officials say
that the government needs to look at all options for getting rid of the
growing pile of hazardous wastes. Proponents of the plan say that by
spreading small, non-lethal amounts into recycled scrap, the need for large
waste dumps could be avoided. CONCERN IS HEALTHY A moratorium was placed
on radioactive recycling last year by former Secretary of Energy Bill
Richardson after environmental groups protested the possible sale of 6,000
metric tons of contaminated nickel from the energy department's Oakridge
nuclear facility in Tennessee to scrap metal dealers. But under the Bush
administration, the program is being revisited and the energy department is
considering lifting the moratorium. But before that, it is required by law to
conduct a thorough study on the safety risks of recycling radioactive waste. The proposal does not
specify any uses for scrap metal containing the radioactive waste, but metal
industry executives say the material would go into the supply of scrap metal
and could be used to make anything. Even the study has proven
problematic. The DOE recently dropped Science Applications International
Corp. (SAIC) - which it initially chose to conduct the study and prepared a
report - because of its business partnership with British Nuclear Fuels
Limited, the company that last year was going to contract with the government
to help sell the waste from the Oakridge facility. Hirsch of the Committee
to Bridge the Gap said it was an enormous potential conflict of interest.
SAIC's report "is quite dangerous in terms of arguing how much
radioactivity would be acceptable for use in consumer products." The energy department has
not said who was hired to complete the study, but some are arguing that the
level of radiation in any recycled materials would be too low to actually
pose a health risk. The Nuclear Energy
Institute, a trade association representing some 260 companies in the nuclear
power industry, has lobbied in favor of radioactive recycling and says the
public may be overly concerned. "Concern is
healthy," said Felix Killar, director of material licenses for the
institute. "But people need to understand the facts. This isn't truly
radioactive waste. It's no more radioactive than any other material recycled
in to consumer products." Killar continues:
"There isn't a place on Earth that is totally free of
radioactivity." A LITTLE RADIATION IS OK John Wittenborn, attorney
for the Metal Industries Recycling Coalition (MIRC), comprised of a variety
of metal industry trade groups, says their polls indicate the public doesn't
buy the idea that nuclear waste can be safely recycled into everyday
products. "We've spent a lot
of time and effort to build the perception that products made from recycled
materials are safe and good and that recycling itself is something that
society should be in favor of," said Wittenborn, whose group strongly
opposes recycling of radioactive waste into scrap metal. Beyond the public image
problem the industry would face in using the recycled waste, companies are
concerned about the potential contamination of their mills and workers. Wittenborn says it can
cost from $5 million to $15 million to shut down, inspect by hand and then
clean a steel mill that has registered radioactivity above a background
level. Recently, Wittenborn
attended an energy department public hearing on the issue in Crystal City,
Virginia where he presented his polling data and the metal industry's case. In fact, those who have
attended the hearings say most of the comments have opposed lifting the
moratorium on radioactive recycling. "The observer might
ask 'Why does the DOE continue to propose to do this if no one is willing to
come forward and testify on behalf of it?'" said Dan Guttman, executive
director of President Clinton's Advisory Committee on Human Radiation
Experiments, "This is being cast
as a question of convincing the hysterical public that a little radiation is
OK." (C) Reuters Limited 2001.
|
|
|
|
|
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.