—

Pa tae ae ee a

Bee ah

One of the lesser-known monsters in
the closet of the atomic age is the prob-
lem of high-level nuclear wastes, which
are building up at a frightening rate with
no long-term method of disposal in sight.

High-level nuclear wastes are the
spent fuel rods from nuclear reactors,
and other radioactive by-products of

electrical power generation and nuclear

weapons production. These substances
will remain hazardous for tens of thou-
sands of years to come. It is impossible to
Overestimate this danger: the Ford
Foundation has described plutonium,

“one important constituent of high-level

nuclear wastes, as being ‘‘1000 times
more toxic than modern nerve gases’’.

There are currently some 8,000 metric
tons of such materials being ‘‘tempor-
arily”’ stored on reactor sites in Canada
alone, and given the Ontario govern-
ment’s recent go-ahead for the giant Dar-
lington nuclear power plant, quantities of
nuclear wastes will skyrocket.

Time Bomb

Radioactive wastes emit gamma
rays and atomic particles that can
injure or kill living things. This
radiation may kill cells or damage
the genetic material essential to
reproduction. Very high levels of
exposure to radiation can make
people sick and kill them very
quickly. Lower levels of exposure
can Cause cancer, sterility, or birth
defects.

Nuclear wastes can be danger-
ous to human beings not only
through direct contact, but also by
getting into water supplies or the
food chain of plants and animals
that we eat. Some radioactive
materials stay dangerously radio-
active for thousands of years, so
we have an obligation to future
generations to permanently isolate

_ those materials from the environ-
sment: Source: CDI

Backgrounder

Fred Weir

After more than 40 years of burgeon-
ing nuclear technology, no one has any
idea of how to permanently dispose of

- these unwanted materials. Any secure

storage site will have to’ be geologically
stable and totally leakproof — and must
be guaranteed to remain that way for
about a quarter of a million years. We
must also find an effective way to warn
the inhabitants of, say, the year 9986, to
stay away from it.

All of this is serious enough without
the news that the Reagan administration
in the. U.S. has begun to cut back funding
for research into long-term solutions to
the nuclear waste problem. To add insult
to injury, the $81-million recently
slashed from the U.S. Department of
Energy’s nuclear pollution control pro-
gram will almost certainly be spent on
new nuclear weapons development pro-
jects instead. As Science magazine re-

_ ports, Washington in its present mood is

“reluctant to spend defence money on
something as unmilitary as the environ-
ment”’.

Nuclear Weapons Buildup

The United States has some 50,000
metric tons of high-level nuclear waste,
more than half of them resulting from
military programs. Since the Reagan
administration took over, and launched a
massive nuclear weapons buildup, quan-
tities of radioactive sludge in need of dis-
posal have escalated sharply.

About 70 per cent of high-level U.S.
military wastes are stored at the Dept. of
Energy’s Savannah River facility, a 300

square mile South Carolina dump site

which environmental activists describe
as ‘‘a national sacrifice area’’ for the Pen-

tagon. Great quantities of these wastes
have already been found to have leaked
from holding tanks,- contaminating the
surrounding soil and underlying ground
water. Scientists say it is only a matter of
time before highly radioactive isotopes
make their way into the Savannah River
— source of drinking water for millions
of Americans.

_ Even more alarming is the possibility
that highly volatile elements in the
wastes, such as plutonium, could begin
to concentrate under conditions of long-

term storage. Theoretically, a point of .

“critical mass’’ could be reached, lead-
ing to an atomic explosion that would
scatter deadly radioactive debris over a
huge area.

Deferred Costs

The accumulation of radioactive waste
is one of the great, unsolved dilemmas of
the nuclear age. It is essentially a de-
ferred cost which future generations
must bear as the price of our failure to.
gain control over spiralling technology
and to plan its uses in a rational way.

In the U.S. this problem is especially
acute: private utilities which control the
nuclear power industry there have been
notorious for seeking the quickest and
simplest means of unloading their ef-
fluents, while expecting the public to
eventually pick up the tab for clean-up.
Here in Canada, Ontario Hydro’s record

is only somewhat better.

Civilian wastes at least result from
electrical power generation, or medical
applications, which have much redeem-
ing value. Tens of thousands of tons of
deadly radioactive garbage, however,
are piling up as a result of military activi-

ties that are part of no socially produ’
process.
The Bottom Line
Some of the Pentagon’s nucleall®
results from the operation of mW
powered submarines and aie vel
riers, but most comes from the de)
ment and production of new ®
weapons. Thus, while building
means of Armageddon, they are a
a slowly ticking atomic ‘time-bomb!
will threaten our children, and theit of
dren down to the hundredth gener
There may ultimately be 1° Ay
safe and economical way of dealing
these wastes, short of firing the
outer-space or pumping them deep
the Earth’s mantle. But solutions ig
ly need to be found before these 4
chicks start coming home to 100S* 1s
truly scandalous that while billiom
dollars go into the creation of Bg
clear weapons, research on how i ih
trol and dispose of these deadly;
effluents is actually being cut bae

Ticking away: radioactive wastes
dumped in open pit at Maxey Flat®
tucky.

By WILLIAM POMEROY

Eight months after Britain’s Margaret Thatcher and

_ the Republic of Ireland’s Garret Fitzgerald signed their
Anglo-Irish Agreement, both Northern Ireland and the
Republic are embroiled in fresh waves of violence and
sectarian confrontation.

The Anglo-Irish Agreement, intended to foster all-
Ireland and cross-border security, and especially coop-
eration against the Irish Republican Army (IRA), marks
an alliance between Britsh imperialism and the present
conservative rulers of the Irish Republic. Britain is trying
to move away from its very narrow base of control in
Northern Ireland among the Protestant Unionist sector
of the population, toward alliance with Irish bourgeois
nationalism in both the North and the Republic.

The Agreement marks the first time the Republic has
recognized British sovereignty over Northern Ireland,
while the instruments and framework for implementing
cooperation give Britain a considerable influence in
independent Ireland. Proposed concessions to the

* mainly Catholic nationalist or Republican minority in the

North are aimed at drawing this anti-British rule sector

into collaboration, isolating the IRA.

British imperialism’s position throughout Ireland
would be strengthened by implementing the Agreement,
but it has been strongly opposed by precisely the
Unionist forces that have backed continued British rule
in Northern Ireland. The exclusive veto position the
Unionist sector has exercised over any change in North-
ern Ireland or in British pelicy — by violence, general
strikes, boycotts and sabotage — would no longer pre-
vail. The more extremist Unionist groups are waging a
violent campaign against the Agreement and have

Anglo-Irish agreement deepens splits

threatened all-out civil war if it is fully implemented.

Among the Unionists, opposition is being led by the
Rev. Ian Paisley’s Democratic Unionist Party. The DUP
threatens civil war against both the Republican minority
and the British army and police, and a possible
‘‘unilateral declaration of independence.”’ In July, 4,000
of these ‘‘Loyalists’’ seized control of the town of
Hillsborough, where the Agreement was signed.

Paisley’s group does not have unified backing from the
Unionist sector. Its effort to calla general strike in March
fizzled. The hints at civil war have not met with enthu-
siasm. - ;

There is dissension within the DUP. For all his in-
flammatory oratory, the aging Paisley has tended to be-
come more politically cautious in leadership. He is being
challenged by the. DUP second-in-command, Peter

Robinson, a 37-year-old former real estate agent who is

an MP from Belfast in the British House of Commons.
Robinson advocates hard- line confrontation to destroy
the Agreement.

On Aug. 6 he led a band of masked Loyalists across
the border to a demonstration raid in the village of Clon-
tibret in the Irish Republic. He was arrested, jailed and
charged with unlawful assembly and assaulting police
officers. When he arrived for his Aug. 14 court appear-
ance with Paisley and 50 followers from Belfast in the
North, there was a violent street battle and the
townspeople ran the Unionists out of town and back over
the border.

Robinson and his group in the DUP manufactured this
situation to provoke a clash with the Republic and to
discredit the Agreement.

Meantime the Provisional IRA, alarmed by signs th
the main bourgeois nationalist party among the Cat
Republican minority in the North — the Social Dem re
tic and Labor Party — leans toward support for | E
Agreement, has intensified aspects of its armed st™
against British rule. 4s

It has enlarged the range of what it describes op
‘legitimate targets,’’ in the past limited to British ;
and members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary:
year it has also attacked businessmen who take cont
from the British authorities to build army or police rs :
or installations, or who undertake catering or other
vices for the British forces. th

Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein leader identified with | nthe
IRA, says: ““The business class are growing rich 0? bet
backs of this struggle.” Five businessmen have cy
killed in the carrying out of the IRA intimidation polit

The Communist Party of Ireland opposes the
Irish Agreement, which it sees as designed to mot
British imperialism. But it adamantly opposes C0? sit
tational positions from either side which create dis¥
among the people. cof

While the Agreement must be defeated, nis
munists say that should not be done by going back wo ;
to surrender to the Unionists but through withdraW
British control and influence, through establishiné i
all-Ireland political authority, through having
people of Ireland decide on the future form of 0” fs
ment, and, as part of the transition, tour an act {It
nomous government in the North. Above all, a f |
program to bring people together, by joint srusae® 7
better conditions and civil rights, is indispensabl ss Sia

— U.S. Beople’s Daily W

8 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, SEPTEMBER 17, 1986

{3 te Oe Se ee be
Bcf, »