Critical Issues Forum: Benchmark II

Writers: Xochi Edgerton-Benitez, Kevin Almestad, Omran Al-Mesned, Alex Dopkin, Chris Sarmiento

Editor: Zachary H. Scheffler

Bibliography: Chris Sarmiento

Nuclear Energy Production:

Energy has become as critical to society as sanitation, clean drinking water, and other basic necessities. As the need for energy grows, so must society’s ability to produce it. The demand for new energy places critical decisions in the hands of citizens, because they must balance the cost and risks of energy production with its benefits. All forms of energy production, including nuclear, coal, petroleum, hydroelectricity, natural gas, wind, and solar, have environmental and social costs. Although less costly and potentially a viable means of energy production, nuclear energy creates a potentially greater cost and risk then other forms.

Domestic and International Cooperation:

The U.S. is in partnership with twenty-one countries to find technological advances which will help the long term safety of nuclear power. President Bush believes that the increase of nuclear energy will produce a clean source of electricity. Nuclear power produces energy in large amounts and causes less pollution to our environment. Recently, the President George W. Bush administration invested over 300 million dollars in nuclear energy. Along with this investment, the Administration proposed the nuclear power 2010 program, which requires that six nuclear power facilities are built and operating in the US this year. In addition, thirteen more are to be built in 2009 and operating by the following year. These plants are to be spread throughout the US with none planned for California. The argument for building these facilities is based on the amount of power and the low cost of production of these plants. As the production of nuclear generated power increases so does the amount of nuclear waste and contamination. Part of the plan in developing these facilities must include what to do with the radioactive byproducts.

Nuclear Waste:

There are many concerns with the disposal of nuclear waste, nuclear pollution, and environmental contamination. The Atomic Energy Act refers to a number of different laws around the world meant to govern nuclear power and nuclear weapons production. The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 in the US established the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. International organizations like the United Nations seek to promote disarmament of nuclear weapons and cooperation amongst scientists in developing nuclear energy. There is both agreement and cooperation domestically and internationally for the safe use of nuclear power and the ecological disposal of nuclear waste. All organizations agree the dumping of nuclear waste in the ocean is prohibited. The London Dumping Convention prohibits high level wastes dumping in the ocean and requires a permit for the dumping of nuclear waste. Typically nuclear waste is buried in large land fills in sparsely populated areas. However these disposal grounds present environmental risks to the water systems and in the air such as in Maxey Flats, Kentucky where runoff contaminated more than a hundred and twenty wells from 1963 to 1977. During this time approximately 533,000 pounds of uranium and thorium contaminated over nine hundred acres of land. Since this time, companies specializing in the handling and removal of nuclear wastes have emerged. For this reason there is significant cooperation between domestic and international regulatory groups, because they hope to prevent needless poisoning of citizens and the environment.

Regulatory Groups:

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) are a few of the international organizations which help to enact laws and regulations related to nuclear energy. In addition the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) ensures that the use of nuclear materials and nuclear weapons do not spread to other countries. The NRC helps countries develop organizations that promote nuclear safety standards. The NRC is also the US authority for the exportation and importation of nuclear materials and equipment. The safe handling of nuclear materials represents only one safety concern.

Nuclear Safety:

With handling of nuclear materials and the production of energy from nuclear sources several risks are present. As discussed radioactive contamination is a major concern. In addition accidents from malfunctioning equipment and inadequate containment facilities such as with Chernobyl make the cost of nuclear production less attractive. These problems are traditionally inherent in the production of nuclear energy. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, a new risk has surfaced. The safety of nuclear facilities has become a major concern in New York City, Washington D.C., and other major metropolitan areas because of the threat of planes crashing into them and creating a nuclear catastrophe. Part of the concern in today’s world is with the structural integrity of a nuclear plant from a collision with a jet plane.

The NRC reassures the public that “Although nuclear power plants are not explicitly designed for the crash of a commercial aircraft, plants have inherent capability to provide for the protection of public health and safety. Pre-stressed concrete containment buildings are robust, and it is unlikely a large commercial plane could penetrate the containment structure. Furthermore, plant designs and redundant safety equipment along with highly trained operators are in place to limit the potential consequences” (California Energy Commission). In this day and age when considering the design and development of a nuclear plant, governments must also consider the vulnerability of the facility to a terrorist attack.

The harnessing of nuclear power has challenged scientists for the last century. Nuclear power and the structures and technology supporting a nuclear facility continues to progress. For these reasons nuclear power becomes a safer, cleaner, and cheaper form of energy each year. Nevertheless, there continues to be problems with the disposal of nuclear waste and toxic contaminants which result from the production of nuclear energy. Moreover, nuclear plants are now a favorite target of terrorists’ assaults. In spite of the fact that nuclear energy is less expensive than gas, oil, and coal the risks and prospects of a disaster out way the short term savings.

Comprehensive security measures and standards are required to protect nuclear power plants and their waste from any possible terrorist threat. Such threats include attack by aircraft, drive-in car bomb attacks, and force-on-force attacks. There can also be sabotage from inside the plant, and from people attempting to break in to damage the plant. All nuclear power plants must have strict security standards to protect against such threats.

To protect against airborne attacks, a nuclear power plant must have emergency plans and counterattack plans in place. Nuclear power plant reactors must be able to withstand an impact from a commercial airplane. Nuclear power plants also must have the ability to keep the nuclear radiation boxed into their plant during one of these attacks. [1]

Another possible threat to a nuclear power plant’s security would be a force-on-force threat, and/or a car-bomb drive-in. A force-on-force threat involves a terrorist group trying to sabotage a plant by force. In order to protect against such attacks, all nuclear power plants have a strict counterattack procedure. In order to insure that plant security is ready for these attacks, each nuclear power plant must undergo a practice force-on-force attack every three years. Trained ‘terrorist’ forces will

attempt to attack the nuclear power plant in a variety of scenarios. The plant guards must be able to defend against the attack while maintaining the required plant security throughout the rest of the plant. All the ‘terrorists’ and guards will be carrying modified weapons that only fire blanks and lasers, so that no actually damage is done. Many plants also have guard towers that will be able to stop a vehicle trespassing on the property. [1] Some Nuclear Power Plants offered to built beams and cables surrounding the reactors, to destroy any incoming aircrafts before they could reach the reactor, but was ruled unnecessary by the NRC.

On top of all of the training, planning, and tests, regular check-ins, background checks, and reviews are conducted on over each worker in the nuclear power plant to insure that he/she is staying loyal and not attempting any sabotage.

Also, security plans and emergency plans are required to be made in advance to almost any possible attack or breakdown. Warnings must be able to go out and reach people within a 10 mile radius by siren if needed.

Not all incidents in Nuclear Power Plants are caused by attacks and sabotage. Plant reactors can ‘meltdown’ or overheat due to the extreme temperatures. Also, leaks can occur if cracks emerge in the reactor’s frame. To prevent these problems, reactors are constantly checked by mechanics and specialists. Although these incidents rarely happen on a large scale, they still may, and emergency plans and methods to control the radiation and waste are in place.

All the problems are not just in the Nuclear Power Plant itself however. While creating nuclear energy, a large amount of waste is formed. This is known as Spent Fuel (Plutonium, Uranium, and others: all of which can be used to make Nuclear Weapons). Spent Fuel is then sent into a cooling reactor to cool off. If the water drains, or overheats, the reactor could catch fire. If this waste is stolen, it could be used to make weapons of mass destruction. After cooling off, the waste can then be sent off the facility, and into a separate facility to hold it; also with heavy security.

There are many security procedures to ensure that Nuclear Power Plants stay as safe as possible.

International Regulations of Nuclear Energy

The European Union is starting to discourage the use of nuclear energy as a major power source. The reason is that nuclear power is not a renewable resource and according to the European Union Commission’s Green Paper nuclear power is an undesirable source of energy because there is still no way to permanently store nuclear waste. The writers of the Green Paper acknowledge that Europe is constantly using more and more energy. They know that if nuclear power reactors are not built, it will increase Europe’s dependency of fossil fuels. The EU has a few challenges it must face that are made even more difficult by listing nuclear energy as an undesirable fuel type. One difficulty is that in order to meet the energy needs of the European Union the Member States would need about 30 new energy structures to generate power. There are also environmental concerns within the EU. Eight nations in the European Union use nuclear energy and five of them have agreed to suspend the activity of the nuclear power plants. This leaves only France, Finland and the United Kingdom as the EU members who have not taken action to reduce the use of nuclear energy in their country. It is very clear that the EU cannot be fully powered by renewable energy, so when the need for new reactors comes, they are spending millions of euros to create more economic, simpler and safer nuclear power plants.

For the United Nations, The International Atomic Energy Agency was set up in order to watch nuclear activity in countries involved in the UN. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been working since its creation to reduce the amount of nuclear energy, therefore lowering the amount of capability countries have to create nuclear weapons. They do not want to completely eliminate nuclear energy necessarily, because they work to verify that power plants are safe and that the nuclear byproducts are not used for military purposes, they also help with security in these power plants by providing standards and expert guidance for countries using nuclear energy. They guide countries by helping to create better technologies that are safer for the environment, to people’s health and are more energy efficient.

France is one of the largest users in nuclear energy throughout the world. France has 59 reactors and 78% of France’s power is nuclear. France uses about 482 billion kWh and produces 549 billion kWh of nuclear energy, giving it a huge surplus of energy which is exported to other countries. France has exported around 60-70 billion kWh of energy each year in the last decade. France began to use nuclear energy after the first oil shock, in order to cope with the loss of energy and become a more self sufficient country. For France, nuclear energy is the most economic form of energy. France is currently trying to reduce their use of nonrenewable energies. France, in addition, is deciding on whether to build a series of 40 European Pressurized Water Reactors by 2015. Currently a nuclear power plant is being build at Flamanville in Normandy. This power plant is going to be used to power France and Italy. The most recent debate is whether to use water cooled nuclear reactors or gas cooled nuclear reactors. Gas cooled reactors are the goal because they makes it possible to re-use the waste that is normally too unstable to be reprocessed. France is dependent on nuclear energy and is one of the largest nuclear energy users in the world.

Russia is also a large user in nuclear energy and has 31 nuclear power plants that are in use today. Currently Russia has decided to develop more nuclear power. The Russians goal is to have the country creating 2-3 GWe of energy per year and exporting enough of that to meet some of the world demands by 2030. They are increasing their role the proliferation in nuclear energy for a few reasons. The first reason is to power the entire country of Russia and meet the rising demand of energy. Second, so they want to sell off their natural gas instead of using it. Russia makes five times the profit from selling their natural gas than using it domestically. Russia plans to make a profit from the amount of excess energy they expect to send out up through 2030. The Russians have an increasing interest in nuclear power and are becoming a prominent country in the use of nuclear energy.

China is a fairly large user of nuclear energy as well. China has 11 nuclear power plants in operation. In 2005, China reached an output of 2375 billion kWh, 9 GWe from nuclear power plants. There are 6 nuclear power plants that are currently under construction in China right now and there are new plans for additional construction. They plan to increase their nuclear energy output to 40 GWe by 2020 and then triple or quadruple that amount by 2030 at a total of 120-160 GWe. Due to China’s rapid development, the demand of energy is growing exponentially. China is powered about 80% by fossil fuels. China hopes to become more self-sufficient in creating their energy by the construction and design of the nuclear reactors. Even if they build the reactors, they will still rely on imported uranium to power their program. These are China’s plans in regards to nuclear energy.

All of the group organizations throughout the world have deemed the nonproliferation of nuclear energy their goal, yet it is obvious that China, France and Russia, being major players in group organizations around the world, are increasing their use of nuclear energy and expanding their nuclear programs. In conclusion, most large countries do not support nonproliferation of nuclear power and continue to increase their domestic use in nuclear power.

Countries Seeking Nuclear Energy

The knowledge of nuclear energy has made many countries covet its power. Whether using nuclear energy as a way to power dozens of cities or using its waste to create nuclear weapons, countries have shown interest to nuclear energy because of the power it possesses. Most countries that have recently indicated their interest in nuclear energy are in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. More specifically the following countries: Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, South Africa, Iran, and Iraq.

Japan began its nuclear research program in 1954 in order to find a new, usable power source. In Japan, nuclear materials must be used in a peaceful way because of the Atomic Energy Basic Law (AEBL). The AEBL states the following: “to secure energy resources in the future, to achieve the progress of science and technology and the promotion of industries by fostering the research, development and utilization of atomic energy and thereby to contribute to the welfare of mankind and to the elevation of the national living standard.”[2] Japan uses nuclear energy in two ways: using it to produce electricity, and selling the excess to other countries. At the moment, Japan has 54 reactors, totaling to 45,420 MWe (megawatt electrical) on line, along with 3 other reactors that will total to 3300 MWe.[3]

South Korea began its nuclear research program in 1957 for the same reason as Japan. When the AEBL came into effect in 1958, South Korea, like Japan, was forced to use nuclear materials in a peaceful way. South Korea uses nuclear energy as a way to produce electricity. At the moment, South Korea has 20 reactors, totaling to 17,533 MWe on line.[4]

The Philippines began its nuclear research program in 1958, under the Philippine Science Act of 1958. The Philippine Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC), which was created from the Philippine Science Act of 1958, was used to “conduct or cause the research and development of, among others, processes, materials and devices used in the production of atomic energy.”[5] This commission, however, was dropped due to dropped economic support from the country. In more recent years, the Philippines have faced electric power outages due to poorly maintained power plants. The government created a new commission which would find ways to solve the electricity problems that the country has been facing. This commission would be using nuclear energy.

South Africa began its use of nuclear energy in the mid 1970s. The country decided to begin the use of nuclear energy in order to solve the problems it was facing. Those problems were the following: electricity outages and an abundance of coal reserves. However, unlike countries like Japan, South Africa does not invest heavily into nuclear power. For example, South Africa only has two reactors, totaling to 1942 MWe on line.[6]

Iran began its nuclear research program in the 1950s. Their research became possible because of the United States. The United States decided to provide the budget for the research program in exchange for Mohammad Reza Pahlavi coming into power.[7] In 1974, Pahlavi believed that the oil supply would run out as time passed, which led to an interest in nuclear energy. At the moment, there are more than 30 reactors in Iran, which are spread out into 16 different areas. Specifically, those areas are the following: Anarak, Arak, Ardakan, Bonab, Bushehr, Chalus, Darkovin, Isfahan, Karaj, Lashkar Abad, Lavizan, Natanz, Parchin, Saghand, Tehran, and Yazd.[8]

Iraq began its nuclear research program in the 1970s. Unlike other countries, their interest in nuclear materials stemmed from the fact that they wanted to create nuclear weapons for wartime use. This became evident when Iraq tried to purchase a plutonium production reactor similar to the one France used for its nuclear weapons program.[9] With the recent events that have happened (namely the Iraq War, which is still in progress), it is clear that Iraq’s intentional use of nuclear materials hasn’t changed.

The following chart is meant to show how much energy a country produces in the world:

http://www.huri.harvard.edu/workpaper/chart2.gif

The chart above displays the share of nuclear energy production by country. For example, Lithuania produces 76.4% of the world’s nuclear energy, while Brazil only produces 0.01% of the world’s nuclear energy.

Country	Warheads active/total*	Source
Five nuclear weapons states from the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
United States	5,163 / 9,938	1
Russia (former Soviet Union)	5,830 / 16,000	2
United Kingdom	200	3
France	<350	4
China	200^http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons - _note-13	5
Other known nuclear powers
India	70-120	6
Pakistan	30-80	7
North Korea	1-10	8
Undeclared nuclear weapons states
Israel	75-200	9, 10, 11
Unknown
Iraq	???	14
North Korea	???	14

1. Norris, Robert S., and Hans M. Kristensen, "The U.S. stockpile, today and tomorrow", Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 63:5 (September/October 2007): 60-63,
2. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "Russian nuclear forces, 2006," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62:2 (March/April 2006): 64-67,
3. "Government announces intention to maintain the UK's Nuclear Deterrent", Defence News, UK Ministry of Defence (4 December 2006). "We have already reduced our operationally available stockpile to less than 200 and today's decision will see that number reduced to less than 160."
4. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "French nuclear forces, 2005," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 61:4 (July/August 2005): 73-75,
5. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "Global Nuclear Stockpiles, 1945-2006," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62:4 (June/July 2006): 64-67,
6. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "India's nuclear forces, 2005," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 61:5 (September/October 2005): 73-75,
7. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "Pakistan's nuclear forces, 2001," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 58:1 (January/February 2002): 70-71,
8. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "North Korea's nuclear program, 2005," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 61:3 (May/June 2005): 64-67,
9. globalsecurity.org. Nuclear Weapons Testing - North Korean Statements
10. Norris, Robert S., William Arkin, Hans M. Kristensen, and Joshua Handler. "Israeli nuclear forces, 2002," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 58:5 (September/October 2002): 73-75.
11. Federation of American Scientists: Nuclear Weapons - Israel
12. Arms Control Association: Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance
13. Chart from Wikipedia
14. AJ Software & Multimedia, “map-nuclear-world.gif.” Internet. <http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/coldwar/images/map-nuclear-world.gif>

14

<http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/coldwar/images/map-nuclear-world.gif>

“Up to 130 terrorist groups could threaten the world with the ultimate nightmare of a home-made atomic bomb by tapping into the growing black market in nuclear explosives, according to a secret new report by the United Nations.”¹ These groups are very dangerous to the survival of humanity because most of them like Aum Shinrikyo, which released deadly Sarin gas into the Tokyo underground in 1995. ¹ Osama Bin Laden’s group also known as Al-Qaida is located in Afghanistan. ¹ There are a lot of other groups that are small lesser known groups of some are extremists or incredibly religious. “This terrifying analysis came from Alex Schmid, the head of the UN's Terrorism Prevention Branch, in a confidential paper to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna last week. Terrorists have the motive and the capability to develop a nuclear capability, he said, and there is enough plutonium and enriched uranium left over from the Cold War to make hundreds of thousands of bombs.” The former Soviet Union didn’t have much protection for their nuclear materials and its risk of being stolen is growing.¹ "Time might not be on our side. The amount of plutonium in the world is increasing," Schmid warned. "Vigorous efforts need to be made to keep the nuclear genie in the bottle and out of the hands of terrorists." ¹ The 130 terrorist groups include 50 religious groups, 20 left wing groups and 55 ethnic groups. If any of these groups get their hands on nuclear weapons there could be an international crisis.

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/images/Nuke2.JPG

CONFIRMED NUCLEAR SMUGGLING CASES ¹

January 2001/ Latvia / unauthorised transfer of six grams of plutonium¹

January 2001/ Greece / illegal disposal of three grams of plutonium¹

April 2000/ Georgia / 920 grams of enriched uranium pellets seized¹

April 2000/ Bulgaria / 10 grams of highly enriched uranium seized¹

September 2000/ Georgia / 0.4 grams of plutonium seized¹

October 1999/ Kyrgyzstan / 1.5 grams of plutonium seized¹

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna¹

TERRORIST GROUPS AND STATES IN THE MARKET FOR NUCLEAR BOMBS¹

Aum Shinrikyo, the Japanese religious cult which flooded a Tokyo subway with poison sarin gas in 1995¹

Al Qaeda, the group run by Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, which killed 213 people in Kenya with a car bomb in 1998¹

Iraq, suspected of trying to acquire nuclear weapons¹

Iran, suspected of trying to acquire nuclear weapons¹

Libya, suspected of trying to acquire nuclear weapons¹

North Korea, suspected of trying to acquire nuclear weapons¹

1. Edwards, Rob, “130 terrorist groups capable of nuclear attack, says UN.” 5/13/01. Internet. 3/17/08. http://www.robedwards.com/2001/05/130_terrorist_g.html

Bibliography

1. FEMA,Nuclear Power Plant Emergency. http://www.fema.gov/hazard/nuclear/index.shtm
2. FEMA, Assuring the Safety of Nuclear Power. MARK STRAUCH https://www.llnl.gov/str/Strauch.html
3. US department of Energy, Nuclear 2010. http://www.nuclear.gov/np2010/neNP2010a.html
4. The White House, Energy Security for the 21st Century. President George W. Bush, March 5, 2008 http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/
5. Edwards, Rob, “130 terrorist groups capable of nuclear attack, says UN.” 5/13/01. Internet. 3/17/08. <http://www.robedwards.com/2001/05/130_terrorist_g.html>
6. Norris, Robert S., and Hans M. Kristensen, "The U.S. stockpile, today and tomorrow", Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 63:5 (September/October 2007): 60-63,
7. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "Russian nuclear forces, 2006," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62:2 (March/April 2006): 64-67,
8. "Government announces intention to maintain the UK's Nuclear Deterrent", Defence News, UK Ministry of Defence (4 December 2006). "We have already reduced our operationally available stockpile to less than 200 and today's decision will see that number reduced to less than 160."
9. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "French nuclear forces, 2005," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 61:4 (July/August 2005): 73-75,
10. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "Global Nuclear Stockpiles, 1945-2006," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62:4 (June/July 2006): 64-67,
11. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "India's nuclear forces, 2005," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 61:5 (September/October 2005): 73-75,
12. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "Pakistan's nuclear forces, 2001," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 58:1 (January/February 2002): 70-71,
13. Norris, Robert S. and Hans M. Kristensen. "North Korea's nuclear program, 2005," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 61:3 (May/June 2005): 64-67,
14. globalsecurity.org. Nuclear Weapons Testing - North Korean Statements
15. Norris, Robert S., William Arkin, Hans M. Kristensen, and Joshua Handler. "Israeli nuclear forces, 2002," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 58:5 (September/October 2002): 73-75.
16. Federation of American Scientists: Nuclear Weapons - Israel
17. Arms Control Association: Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance
18. Chart from Wikipedia
19. AJ Software & Multimedia, “map-nuclear-world.gif.” Internet. http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/coldwar/images/map-nuclear-world.gif
20. “Country Briefings.” World Nuclear Association. 2008. World Nuclear Association. 24 March 2008 <http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/default.aspx>
21. “News Stories.” IAEA Division of Public Information. 2003. International Atomic Energy Agency. 24 March 2008 <http://www.iaea.org/About/index.html>
22. De Esteban, Fernando. “The future of nuclear energy in the European Union.” Energy and Transport European Commision. 2002. European Commission. 24 March 2008 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/doc/brusselsfdemay2002.pdf
23. “Nuclear Power in Japan.” Nuclear Power in Japan. Uic.com. 15 Mar. 2008. http://www.uic.com.au/nip79.htm
24. “Nuclear Power in Korea.” Nuclear Power in Korea. Uic.com. 15 Mar. 2008. http://www.uic.com.au/nip81.htm
25. “Using Nuclear Energy: A Philippine Experience.” Philippines. Department of Political Science, University of the Philippines. 15 Mar. 2008 http://www.cscap.nuctrans.org/Nuc_Trans/locations/philippine-june10/philippine.htm
26. “Nuclear Power in South Africa.” Nuclear Power in South Africa. Uic.com. 15 Mar 2008. http://www.uic.com.au/nip88.htm
27. “The spectre of Operation Ajax” Dan De Luce: The spectre of Operation Ajax | Politics | The Guardian. Guardian.co.uk. 15 Mar. 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/aug/20/foreignpolicy.iran
28. “The Middle East and North Africa.” The Middle East and North Africa. Fas.org.
29. 15 Mar. 2008. http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/prolif96/me_na.html
30. “Atomic Energy Basic Law.” Atomic Energy Basic Law – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 24 Mar. 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Energy_Basic_Law
31. “Nuclear facilities in Iran.” Nuclear facilities in Iran – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 24 Mar. 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_facilities_in_Iran\
32. Mark Holt and Anthony Andrews. “Nuclear Power Plant

Security and Vulnerabilities”. Specialists in Energy

Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division. 17

March 2008. 

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL34331.pdf

33. Mark Holt and Anthony Andrews. “Nuclear Power Plants: Vulnerability to

Terrorist Attacks”. Specialists in Energy Policy, Science, and Industry Division. 17 March 2008.

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RS21131.pdf

34. “Nuclear Waste Disposal”. 18 March 2008.

http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/EZRA/

35. Gov. “Oakridge National Laboratory”. 18 March 2008.

http://www.ornl.gov

36. Anna Gosline, Katie Law, Anne Casselman. “Inky Circus”. 18 March 2008.

http://www.inkycircus.com

37. Index of /michael/blog/images 26 March 26, 2008

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/images/Nuke2.JPG

---

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Energy_Basic_Law

[3] http://www.uic.com.au/nip79.htm

[4] http://www.uic.com.au/nip81.htm

[5] http://www.cscap.nuctrans.org/Nuc_Trans/locations/philippine-june10/philippine.htm

[6] http://www.uic.com.au/nip88.htm

[7] http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/aug/20/foreignpolicy.iran

[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_facilities_in_Iran

[9] http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/prolif96/me_na.html