Under the guise of peaceful nuclear power, nuclear weapons proliferation in progress

[kristopher]

Iran Bars Some Nuclear Inspectors, Raising U.N. Alarms


VIENNA — The U.N. atomic agency expressed alarm Monday about Iran's decision to bar some of its inspectors, suggesting that its efforts to monitor the country's nuclear program were suffering as a result.

The unusually blunt International Atomic Energy Agency warning was voiced in a restricted report on Iran made available to The Associated Press that otherwise contained few surprises. It followed Iran's recent decision to strip two experienced inspectors of the right to monitor its nuclear activities after the two reported what they said were undeclared nuclear experiments.

The Islamic Republic says the reporting by the two was inaccurate, but the IAEA stands by the findings. And the 11-page IAEA document issued Monday devoted a special section to the complaint, reflecting the importance attached to it by IAEA chief Yukiya Amano.

Such a section was included in only one previous report, after Iran stripped the right of dozens of inspectors in 2006 and 2007 – most of them in order to show displeasure over recently passed U.N. Security Council sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

Monday's report said that...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/06/iran-bars-nuclear-inspectors-un-iaea-worried_n_706719.html

The upshot is that Iran is barring nuclear inspectors from countries with nuclear weapons because they have the training to spot their weaponization programs.

Nuclear weapons non-proliferation effort are completely undermined by the promotion of nuclear power for profit. It is the same short term corporate oriented wishful thinking that has dominated public policy since the Reagan era. The nuclear power industry claims a Rube Goldberg recycling scheme is a guarantee against any country diverting materials from nuclear power to nuclear weapons development, however as demonstrated by Iran the reverse is true. It is very easy for any country that is under pressure from the international community to appeal to nationalism and garner strong domestic supportwhile waving the banner of domestic energy security. That approach is the basis of moves to build weapons because the key to nuclear energy security lies in the same enrichment technology that is required for producing weapons material.

We currently have less than 500 nuclear plants around the world. Now imagine the world stage if that number rose to between 5,000 and 10,000 reactors; which is where we will end up if the nuclear industry has its way.

[Confusious]

1. Just think, most of the countries with the largest

Populations already know how to make nuclear bombs, but they are the ones most in need of new energy supplies.

You're the only one talking about building nuclear plants in other countries.

Set the straw man pins up, smash them down.

[kristopher]

2. We are talking about policy over the next 50-100 years.

* Over thirty countries are actively considering embarking upon nuclear power programs.
* These range from sophisticated economies to developing nations.

Nuclear power is under serious consideration in over thirty countries which do not currently have it (in a few, consideration is not necessarily at government level). For countries in bold, nuclear power prospects are more fully dealt with in specific country papers:

* In Europe: Italy, Albania, Serbia, Portugal, Norway, Poland, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Ireland, Turkey.
* In the Middle East and North Africa: Iran, Gulf states including UAE & Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Israel, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Sudan.
* In west, central and southern Africa: Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal, Uganda, Namibia.
* In South America: Chile, Ecuador, Venezuela.
* In central and southern Asia: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Bangladesh
* In SE Asia: Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand.
* In east Asia: North Korea

Despite the large number of these emerging countries, they are not expected to contribute very much to the expansion of nuclear capacity in the foreseeable future – the main growth will come in countries where the technology is already well established. However, in the longer term, the trend to urbanisation in less-developed countries will greatly increase the demand for electricity, and especially that supplied by base-load plants such as nuclear. The pattern of energy demand in these countries will become more like that of Europe, North America and Japan.

Some of the above countries can be classified according to how far their nuclear programs or plans have progressed:

* Power reactors under construction: Iran.
* Contracts signed, legal and regulatory infrastructure well-developed: UAE, Turkey.
* Committed plans, legal and regulatory infrastructure developing: Vietnam, Jordan, Italy.
* Well-developed plans but commitment pending: Thailand, Indonesia, Egypt, Kazakhstan, Poland, Belarus, Lithuania.
* Developing plans: Saudi Arabia, Israel, Nigeria, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Morocco, Chile.
* Discussion as serious policy option: Namibia, Mongolia, Philippines, Singapore, Albania, Serbia, Estonia & Latvia, Libya, Algeria, Azerbaijan.
* Officially not a policy option at present: Australia, New Zealand, Portugal, Norway, Ireland.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf102.html

The Nuclear Power Industry is trying to sell nuclear power anywhere they can by any means they can. They care not one iota about the long term risks except as a threat to short term profits.

[Confusious]

6. Almost all of those countries are signatories

To the nuclear non proliferation agreement.

Iran and north Korea are not, but they developed it on their own.

Also, quite a few of those countries are in the EU, or have nuclear power already. Italy, Norway, israel

[Confusious]

7. Besides that

Aren't we suppose to be having the glorious renewable energy revolution?

If it's 50 to 100 years, the point is moot. By then we'll be swimming in renewable energy.

[pscot]

3. Nuclear war would most definitely

slow the pace of greenhouse emissions, so we got that goin for us.

[kristopher]

4. I've heard that assumption, but not sure it holds...

Our one example is Japan. Not only would 40%-60% of any city combusted be released as atmospheric carbon, but the rebuilding would be a burst of economic activity that would last at least a decade.

[pscot]

5. If rebuilding were to take place on the

20TH Century model.

[DrGregory]

8. enrichment is not neccessary for nuclear power

>That approach is the basis of moves to build weapons because the key to nuclear energy security lies in the same >enrichment technology that is required for producing weapons material.

The counter-example to the above claim is Canada.

The Canadian CANDU reactors run on UNENRICHED uranium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor

Dr. Greg

[NNadir]

9. Anti-nukes - all of whom greenwash the dangerous fossil fuel industry -

notably are silent about observed types of wars using the form of energy that funds the anti-nuke industry.

To wit:

http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Amory+B.+Lovins">Famous Anti-nuke Amory Lovins describes his revenue sources:

Mr. Lovins’s other clients have included Accenture, Allstate, AMD, Anglo American, Anheuser-Busch, Bank of America, Baxter, Borg-Warner, BP, HP Bulmer, Carrier, Chevron, Ciba-Geigy, CLSA, ConocoPhillips, Corning, Dow, Equitable, GM, HP, Invensys, Lockheed Martin, Mitsubishi, Monsanto, Motorola, Norsk Hydro, Petrobras, Prudential, Rio Tinto, Royal Dutch/Shell, Shearson Lehman Amex, STMicroelectronics, Sun Oil, Suncor, Texas Instruments, UBS, Unilever, Westinghouse, Xerox, major developers, and over 100 energy utilities. His public-sector clients have included the OECD, the UN, and RFF; the Australian, Canadian, Dutch, German, and Italian governments; 13 states; Congress, and the U.S. Energy and Defense Departments.

It will be a cold day in hell when you hear one anti-nuke give a rat's ass about all the people who have died in dangerous fossil fuel wars or to note that there have been zero nuclear wars for 55 years.

Why is that? Just follow the money...follow the money.

I think I'll post a thread about the latest news from that nuclear war threat, the Netherlands.

[Nederland]

10. Nuclear Weapons Proliferation is Inevitable

Iran has three uranium enrichment facilities and two uranium mines. If Iran wants to build a nuclear weapon, in the long run it will build a nuclear weapon. People that believe that nuclear proliferation can be stopped or even slowed down by restricting civilian nuclear power are in complete denial of the facts. The first and foremost of those facts is that the first nuclear weapon was built more than 65 years ago by people that did their calculations using slide rules. This reality means that any country with even the most modest industrial capability can build a nuclear weapon if they want to. The second of these facts is that while it is theoretically possible to obtain bomb material from light water reactor waste, nobody has ever bothered to do so because the alternatives are orders of magnitude easier. Worrying about countries obtaining bomb material from light water reactor waste is like worrying about someone climbing down your chimney to steal your TV when your front door is unlocked and open. Why then does anyone worry about this path to obtaining bomb material? Obviously because it suites their real agenda...