Tuesday, January 30, 2007
NRC: Stopping Aircraft Threat To Nuke Plants Impractical
'Active Protection' From Airborne Attack Military Responsibility
aeronews
Based in part on public comments obtained in November 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Monday said protecting a nuclear power plant from a 9/11-style attack using an airliner is impractical given the scope of its responsibility.
The announcement came as the agency published the executive summary for a defense plan 15 months in the making. Specific details of the plan are considered secret by the US government, but in its statement the NRC said, "The active protection against airborne threats is addressed by other federal organizations, including the military."
Instead of devising ways to protect plants from attack -- such as the so-called "beamhenge" approach which would surround a vulnerable structure with a lattice-like barrier made from large, steel beams -- the NRC says plant operators should focus on limiting the public's exposure to radioactive material in the event of an attack using protection measures and evacuation plans already in place.
"This rule is an important piece, but only one piece, of a broader effort to enhance nuclear power plant security," said NRC Chairman Dale Klein. "Overall we are taking a multi-faceted approach to security enhancements in this post 9/11 threat environment, and looking at how best to secure existing nuclear power plants and how to incorporate security enhancements into design features of new reactors that may be built in coming years."
Predictably, the NRC is already under fire from critics of the plan, some of whom are saying the agency didn't fully account for the real-world threats of a terrorist attack.
Michele Boyd of Public Citizen's Energy Program, a nuclear industry watchdog group, told Business Week, "Rather than requiring measures to prevent a plane crash from damaging vulnerable parts of a nuclear plant ... the government is relying on post-crash measures and evacuation plans."
Those in favor of more active measures, such as US Senator Barbara Boxer of California, suggest the NRC should put plans in place to "defend against large, attacking forces and commercial aircraft."
The NRC argues it must plan for a "reasonable" response from the civilian security forces in place around most civilian nuclear facilities. As such, its security plan assumes a relatively small, lightly-armed attacking force. But critics say the plan doesn't even account for terrorist use of easily obtained, powerful weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades.
The NRC concluded its statement with, "The NRC remains an active partner with other federal and state/local authorities in constant surveillance of the threat environment and will adjust regulatory actions or requirements if necessary."
UN report confirms climate change is happening now
national post
The United Nations' scientific brain trust is poised to say that climate change, once a theoretical future scare story, is real, urgent and warming our air and water right now.
The update from the International Panel on Climate Change, expected Friday, will say it's practically certain the recent instances of unusually warm weather around the world are not natural glitches, but changes caused by human pollution.
Since the panel's last update (in 2001), science journals have been bursting with new measurements and examples of real warming in many places.
The global temperature has warmed up by an average of 0.6 to 0.7 degrees, says Matthew Bramley, director for climate change of the Pembina Institute, a Canadian climate group.
That's measured from pre-industrial times, but most of the increase has happened in the past few decades, he says.
If the increase reaches two degrees, he warns, that's when major and disruptive changes in weather patterns will likely occur.
''When you say one degree or two degrees (of warmer average temperatures) - it doesn't mean much to many people,'' he says. ''It's important to understand that five degrees (Celsius) was enough to make the difference between our climate today and Ottawa having kilometres-thickness of ice'' during the last Ice Age.
The IPCC's scientists are meeting in Paris this week to negotiate final wording of their new assessment of the ''basic science'' behind Earth's climate. In April, they'll announce what specific effects they foresee.
James Bruce, a veteran climate scientist from Ottawa who has worked in a variety of IPCC positions, said a review of the scientific findings in recent years points to several areas where the update is likely to focus.
The biggest change: The scientists who used mathematical models of what might happen a few years ago are now staring at actual measurements showing global warming that's well underway.
The University of East Anglia in England, a specialized climate studies centre, says the 12 warmest years on record have been in the past 13 years.
It also forecasts that 2007 will be a record-setter, 0.54 degrees above the long-term (1961-1990) average of 14.0 degrees worldwide. The hottest year so far was 1998.
''They've got far more evidence of trends in climactic factors and responses (of air and water) that point to the increasing strength of the warming than they ever did before,'' . Bruce said.
Among the findings:
* The oceans are warming with surprising speed.
The warming so far is just a fraction of a degree, but over the whole Earth this translates into a large amount of stored heat.
* The ''mid-latitudes'' - areas between the Arctic and the tropics, like southern Canada, Europe and the United States - are seeing increased incidents of violent weather, especially heavy rainstorms.
* The Gulf Stream is expected to weaken ''in the next little while.'' ''There is some evidence that it's already weakening a little,'' Bruce said.
For now, the Gulf Stream is what keeps Britain warmer than Labrador. The two are about the same distance north, but a cold Arctic current runs past Labrador while Britain gets warm water.
* There's a shift in where the greatest emissions are coming from. And the big source now lies in making electricity.
* Much of the warming has come near the Poles, raising the prospect of melting ice, which could sharply raise sea levels around the world and flood coastlines.
Media Wants Waco-Style Massacre
American Free Press
The circumstances surrounding the Browns, a New Hampshire couple convicted of federal income tax evasion, could turn on a dime.
Recently AFP interviewed Ed Brown, a Plainfield home owner who grew up in the Roxbury slums of Boston. He and Mrs. Brown, who is a dentist, are self-made people who worked hard for their lot in life, only to see it swept away by a government that takes in gargantuan sums of money via taxes on the domestic populace to pay enormous interest on the national debt (which cannot be repaid), much of which is due to America‚s endless military conflicts.
When AFP contacted Brown recently, he was living everyday life as best he can at the house he built on their 110 acres. His wife, who he said is in a state of arrest wearing an electronic ankle bracelet—is staying with a son in a neighboring state.
“The dental business died a week ago Tuesday,” Brown told AFP. “My wife's a prisoner—like she's a flight risk!”
The two are supposed to be sentenced April 24, having each been convicted Jan. 18 in federal court in Concord for not paying income taxes since 1996. The government claims the Browns owe some $625,000.
“Everybody should say, ‘show me the law and I'll pay the tax,' ” Brown told AFP. That is what he told federal authorities who can't seem to produce a copy of a law requiring payment of the federal income tax.
Filmmaker Aaron Russo's America: From Freedom to Fascism documentary interviews a number of former IRS agents and other authoritative people who say that the powers that be, when asked to provide a copy of the law, such as an enabling statute, that requires U.S. workers to pay federal income tax on their wages, come up empty-handed.
Russo concluded that if the federal income tax applies to anyone or anything, it applies to corporate capital gains, not the incomes of individuals, and that the IRS doesn't even define income.
The proverbial “tax man” came down on the Browns just as they had considered selling their home and acreage so they could live in a warmer climate. Notably, their property is across the road from 500 acres owned by Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer.
But making the best of the winter weather, individuals and families with children have been over to Brown's place lately for sledding and skating—before and since the tax trouble began. Life still seems more or less normal, though Brown suspects that federal agents may eventually storm the house and arrest him, perhaps after the publicity on his and his wife's plight calms down.
As of Jan. 25, he said the publicity was still significant, with TV news crews continuing to pay attention. He also told AFP that while he has always paid the 54 other kinds of taxes levied on Americans—with property taxes hitting $14,000 a year on their home and $18,000 a year on their office building for the former dental business—he won't budge on the federal income tax.
For one thing, as already noted, no one can produce a copy of the law that requires payment of an unapportioned tax on the labor of Americans. Moreover, there are due-process issues whereby U.S. District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe apparently disallowed the Browns from bringing forth any evidence or witnesses they needed for defending themselves in court. Also, the issue of federal jurisdiction, or the lack thereof, comes into play, Brown pointed out.
Addressing some conventional media reports that characterized his home as a virtual fortress, or “compound” with a “lookout tower,” Brown replied, “It's a deck, for crying out loud—an octagon-shaped compass deck.”
Just below the elevated deck on the large, well-built house—which has solar-power capability and was off the grid from 1990 to 2003—is a reading room.
“We're very mainstream, middle-class people,” said Brown, who noted that media reports suggesting he's “holed up” in his house are off base.
Some areas of the house have been boarded up to keep out blowing snow, so he is not “barricading” himself in the house, he explained.
The Union Leader seems also to have played the “antigovernment” card, even though many American patriots make a careful distinction by saying they are anti-corruption of government, not anti-government.
Notably, the Associated Press article in The Union Leader couldn't resist the highly charged word “compound,” which conceivably could create a bunker mentality in the minds of readers and may quell public outrage if federal agents ever decide to forcibly enter Brown's home to arrest him. As the article claimed:
“A jury decided that the Browns plotted to hide their income and avoid taxes on Elaine Brown's income of $1.9 million between 1996 and 2003. Over 10 years, they also used $215,890 of postal money orders broken into increments just below the reporting threshold to pay for their hilltop compound and for Elaine Brown's dental offices.”
U.S. marshals said on a couple occasions they had no plans to forcibly enter Brown's property and arrest him, though national media sources quoted marshals as saying that they “have to decide how to seize the Browns' assets, possibly including their home.”
Citing a new twist in this case, a recent issue of The Boston Globe noted that federal agents “seized more than 30 weapons from the Brown house in May.”
Brown commented by telling AFP, “They stole $15,000 worth of my guns and turned them over to a gun shop.”
Brown was still at home on Jan. 25, preferring only to comment off the record about the situation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)