Russian spy death linked to nuclear black market, and other glowings-on

For Every Action, There's a Reactor

Oh, nuclear -- will it ever cease to amaze? As authorities probe the radiation-poisoning death of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, they've suggested a link to Russia's robust radioactive-materials black market. The market's deals, said an International Atomic Energy Agency rep, "are of little concern [terrorism-wise], but they show security vulnerabilities at facilities." That's a comfort. In other storage news, incoming U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says he'd rather leave 50,000 tons of waste at 65 plants in 31 states than pass the feds' flawed plan to dump it all at his state's Yucca Mountain. No doubt easing his mind, the U.S. EPA is expected to issue a waste-disposal rule soon that's intended to cover the next million years. Meanwhile, in Australia, nuclear task force head Ziggy Switkowski (!) says the country's first reactors could come online in a decade. Said Labor Party leader (and fun-stopper) Kim Beazley, "We are not a nation that needs to go down that road."

straight to the source: The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 Nov 2006

straight to the source: The Guardian, Mark Townsend, Antony Barnett, and Tom Parfitt, 26 Nov 2006

straight to the source: Forbes, Associated Press, Erica Werner, 25 Nov 2006

straight to the source: NPR, David Kestenbaum, 24 Nov 2006

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (4 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Bottom trailing

I have seen documentarys on this subject and people who know say that the ocean is like a liquid desert after one of these nets has gone through.Their meaning is that almost nothing alive the swims is left.Everything is picked up,squid,all fishes,even shellfish.Most of the animals die,because all they want is one type of fish and by the time they dump what they don't want back into the ocean it is dead.This is not a good practice and should be stopped.If we don't set limitations then we will kill the ocean and then,quite seriously,we will die too,really!

Why not ask why!?

by usandthem at 11:10 AM on 27 Nov 2006

Bottom trawling is a huge problem -

it is good to see it being taken seriously, although what has been agreed is clearly insufficient.

The agreement punts the issue to regional fisheries management groups, which exist for about a quart of the world's oceans - these regional groups will likely institute bans, although each group will have to fight the same battle before reaching that decision.

Unfortunately, it leaves to the nations under which bottowm trawlers are flagged the question of what, if any, regulations to impose on bottowm trawling in the open seas. That, simply, is a race to the bottom.

There are limited numbers of bottom trawlers; the nations that really care about this issue should be figuiring out what unilateral steps they can take to stop the destruction - by declaring the rest of the seas off limits, policing, and coming up with collective reprisal measures (banning landings, imposing tariffs, starting consumer boycotts) that punish the nations and vessels involved. These will increases the costs to this activity.

by TokyoTom at 4:40 AM on 28 Nov 2006

Climate Change via Carbon Dioxide?

That the world climate is warming is a given, proven by numerous (private sector)scientists to be a direct function of normal solar cycles.... But the carbon dioxide connection is VERY nebulous.
The issue all the government scientists and media are ignoring is the real danger: Atmospheric Methane, a much bigger danger to life on earth than Co2. As the oceans naturally warm, the decay of Methane Hydrate on the ocean floor adds far more greenhouse effect than does Carbon Dioxide. That phenomenon is the real cause of the disaperanance of the dinosaurs, let's see them control THAT one.
We are all doomed to roast.. unless the new predictions of a pending global ice age materialize. Who to believe?

by Gunny4013 at 7:03 AM on 28 Nov 2006

Gunny, perhaps repost this in a climate thread?

I think informed opinion is aware that climate change is about much more then CO2, which is really just used as a shorthand for the entire problem.

by TokyoTom at 10:56 PM on 28 Nov 2006

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?