[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 19 (Monday, February 28, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: February 28, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DANGERS OF OCEAN DUMPING OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, the current practice of dumping
radioactive waste in ocean waters poses a great danger to the
environment and the people of this planet. We must act on our concern
for this problem using readily available technology to clear the seas
of these very dangerous contaminants. Only through remedial action can
we preserve the quality of our oceans for future generations.
I wish to take this opportunity to share with my colleagues a recent
article from the International Economy, written by Koji Yamazaki,
deputy chairman of the Board of Counselors, The Japan Research
Institute, Ltd., in Tokyo. Mr. Yamazaki has long been concerned about
the harm to the ecology caused by the Russian Navy's dumping of
radioactive wastes from nuclear-powered submarines in the Arctic Ocean
and the Sea of Japan.
The article entitled, ``The IMF-Soviet Submarine Connection: A Letter
to Vice President Al Gore'' explores the risk from present wastes
dumped in the ocean and the need to harness commercially available
technologies to clean up these wastes. The author calls upon a
consortium of nations--including the United States, Japan, and Russia--
to participate in this most important endeavor. He suggests a unique
approach to financing this project through the auspices of the
International Monetary Fund.
Mr. Yamazaki has addressed his concerns about ocean dumping of
nuclear wastes to our former colleague, Vice President Al Gore, because
of his record of accomplishment in improving the environment and
because of his continuing efforts to make further progress.
The problems created by the ocean dumping of radioactive materials
are easily obscured in the other serious dangers to our environment.
Mr. Yamazaki's article makes a significant contribution by drawing the
attention of the international community to the need and present
possibility of making the oceans of this world free of man-made nuclear
contaminants. I want to express my gratitude to Mr. Yamazaki's lasting
commitment to the resolution of this most important problem.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the article
be included in the Record, and I urge my colleagues to read this
article.
There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
The IMF-Soviet Submarine Connection: A Letter To Vice-President Al Gore
(By Koji Yamazaki)
Dear Mr. Vice President, recent reports from the Russian
Presidential Office reveal facts, to date concealed, on ocean
dumping of radioactive wastes from nuclear-powered submarines
by the former Soviet Union (FSU). Obsolete nuclear reactors,
some with spent nuclear fuels intact, have been dumped in the
Arctic Ocean and the Sea of Japan by the former Soviet navy.
These reactors contain some of the most toxic materials known
to man, including cesium and strontium, that remain
radioactive for generations.We cannot afford to wait to
discover the long term effects of this nuclear waste.
Unless this barbarous dumping is halted at once the present
as well as the future health of the human race will be
seriously endangered. It is imperative that we, by every
means possible, jointly persuade Russia to stop submarine
dumping at once and ensure that such acts are never repeated.
In response to this some would say, ``As long as the water
temperatures are low and the currents are slow, the risks are
very small.'' Yet I would strongly disagree.
Even King Solomon at the height of his wisdom did not
understand the way of a man with a maiden. How can we discern
the way of fish in the ocean? Indeed, there are four things
that are too horrifying for me, four things that I do not
understand: the way fish eat; the way the ecosystems change;
the way metal decays; and the way oceans move. These are
issues of the food chain; chain reactions in the marine
ecosystem; containers becoming rotten under the deep water
and radioactive substances leaking out over time, and
``upwelling water''--a phenomenon, not yet scientifically
clarified, but which is the sudden upsurge of water occurring
in otherwise calm deep water.
Mr. Vice President, if you cannot guarantee that the waters
will remain still and cold, the risk is so high that the
whole of mankind will be affected.
For the sake of our children and our children's children,
we cannot afford to take the risk.
One thing is very clear: simply adopting another
international declaration will not solve the problem. Marine
dumping has been illegal for a long time and what we need
now is action.
ensuring compliance
Is it possible to remedy the situation with technology? The
answer is yes, but only if the advanced technology of the
West is fully utilized. In the case of obsolete Russian
submarines with spent nuclear fuels remaining in their
reactors, advanced robotics technology, as well as the spent
fuel management technology of the U.S., Japan and Europe are
indispensable for the safe disassembling of these reactors.
These technologies are commercially available, but expensive.
The safe treatment of liquid radioactive wastes from atomic
submarines already dumped in the ocean requires other
advanced technologies from the West. This process of recovery
is more complicated but also possible, if we take prompt
action.
Mr. Vice President, as the West already has this
technology, what is needed is to orchestrate the joint
efforts of the West--the U.S., Japan and Europe--and Russia,
too, into working harmony. Now that the Cold War is over, the
West needs a new vision--a vision not of fighting, but of
working together. In that sense, tackling these common
problems together is a new step--a sure and endurable step
that leads to the peace of the world.
However, the real problem is not merely the technology but
how to finance the operations, since the amount of money
required would be significant.
Mr. Vice President, here is a novel idea on how to fund the
hunt for the new ``Red Octobers,'' that are presently ticking
away under the oceans. In the International Monetary Fund
(IMF), which is the central organization for economic aid to
the FSU, there exists a system called Special Drawing Rights
(SDR), a mechanism of so-called ``artificial money
creation.''
In short, in allocating SDRs we have to take two
fundamental aspects into account. One is the need to avoid
inflation. This is a matter of principle. For example, the
allocation of SDRs to aid LDCs cannot be admitted, as there
are theoretically no limits to LDC aid. For SDRs to be
allocated it is absolutely necessary to have a limit, a
clear-cut defined limit.
Second is the relationship to international liquidity. This
is a matter of logic. It's true to say that when the SDR
system was first introduced it was formulated so that
allocations would be acceptable only to satisfy the need
to supplement global international liquidity. If we stick
to this original notion it would be almost impossible to
admit the SDR allocation when total liquidity is as great
as it is now.
However, the IMF is, in essence, an organization composed
of sovereign states. Their consensus, or a majority opinion,
can become the spirit as well as the interpretation of the
IMP rules and regulations. Using SDRs to hunt and destroy the
new Red Octobers overcomes the financing issue facing the G7
countries in their aid to Russia's inherited problems from
the FSU.
It may be argued that environmental issues do not fall
under the mandates of the IMF. Contrary to this argument, I
believe that crucially important issues such as these--which
have much to do with the present as well as the future
hereditary soundness of the species called ``human beings''--
should be included in the IMF mission.
Mr. Vice President, if it proves to be impossible to tackle
this problem only because of the amount of money needed,
given the presently constrained financial conditions of most
of the countries of the West, then it would be wise and
advisable to allow the allocation of SDR's.
In this case, even though the amount of money involved is
significant, there exists a limit, a very definable limit.
Because of this there would be no risk of inflation. The
worst policy would be to postpone taking action, or to spend
time on extended studies and observations because there isn't
enough money to tackle the issue. Soon it will be too late to
act: the real damage would have been done to the seas, fish,
human beings, and to life as we know it.
By altering the existing rules and regulations, the SDR
allocated in this way should not be distributed to the
contracting parties according to their quota shares, but
pooled (all or part) in a fund established at the IMF and
paid directly to the firms that actually do the job.
It will be better not to given Russia a lump sum, but
instead to make payments directly to the parties carrying out
the work. This will stop the monetary aid from being
politicized and improve the overall efficiency of that
aid. The former Soviet navy has for years handled nuclear
submarine disposal by dumping reactors at sea. Mr. Yeltsin
has officially confirmed this as fact.
There are four questions that need to be addressed. The
first question is: Why give this aid to Russia? The answer
is: By providing Russia this aid we are saving the world's
oceans. This is a global emergency. It's not Alaska alone,
but the whole United States. It's not Russia alone, but the
whole world.
The second question is: Wouldn't this endanger the
sovereignty of the world's monetary authorities? Above all,
wouldn't it affect the monetary policy of the U.S. Federal
Reserve System? The answer is? Certainly not. Just compare
the size of the existing liquidity in the marketplace and
that of probable or possible SDR allocations. It would be
like a cup of water poured into the ocean. Unlike cesium and
strontium, it won't kill anybody. In addition, an eighty-five
majority consent is a sure guarantee.
The third question is: Can we add one or two other limited
cases to the list? The answer is yes, but probably only one
as an exception--the dangerous Chernobyl power reactors. It
depends how you, the United States, think. This issue has the
same roots and is the same global danger to humanity as
marine dumping, if not more.
There are fifteen Chernobyl-type power reactors still
operating in the FSU. In addition, there are ten dangerous
first generation reactors of another type still operating in
the FSU and Eastern Europe.
Some will argue against this statement. Nevertheless, the
problem is so bad that the best we can do is to provide these
countries with technical assistance and advice.
Although it is indeed true to say that the human element is
crucially important in the maintenance of safety, I believe
that we need to establish a sure way to tackle this issue
further for the future.
A good American friend likened it as living in a cottage
under a huge Alpine mountain. Snow falls, accumulating large
masses in the higher elevations. People know that an
avalanche is inevitable. The only question is when and how.
If it comes, we all know what it means to our whole world.
We would not be defending Russian reactors as such, but
rather we are defending the source of energy for the whole
world. It is clear for all to see, that once the second
Chernobyl-like disaster occurs there will be no chance for
the world's nuclear power plants to exist. When that
happens there will be no use in blaming the Russians. The
fate of the world will be determined at that very moment.
Time should not be wasted.
However, the cost to tackle this will be significant. The
World Bank experts estimate the cost as U.S. $21 to $28
billion. A German finance minister estimates 15 billion DMs.
Japanese experts guess somewhere in the region of U.S. $20 to
$50 billion, and probably more. The important point is, it is
more than likely that the cost will exceed what the West can
afford to bear. So it follows, a special fail-safe device
such as SDR allocation is needed to tackle this global issue
fully.
Both of these problems: ocean dumping and nuclear power
reactors are problems of settling post-Cold War arrangements
and, therefore, need to be handled jointly with the West.
The fourth and last question is: How can we resist the
thousands of other global demands? The answer is: It can be
done only by the solid, determined disciplined leadership and
self-restraint of the world leaders, and especially of the
United States. While taking extraordinary measures with
courage, they must be prepared to reject any abuses.
What I am proposing is not to enter through the wide gate
that leads to inflation, nor stand still in front of the gate
and wait for the devastation of the seas and the poisoning of
the air to happen. Instead, I propose we go through the
narrow gate without hesitation, and with determination take
the road that leads to the restoration of our mother earth.
It was Thomas Jefferson who said ``. . . laws and
institutions must go hand-in-hand with the progress of the
human mind,'' and ``. . . institutions must advance also to
keep peace with the times.''
I sincerely hope that by your good counsel, Mr. Vice
President, the 42nd President of the United States of
America, will pay due attention to this history-tested advice
of the 3rd President, and start moving to act. The Red
Octobers are potentially as dangerous as any hazard affecting
our global environment and we can capture and recover them
now.
____________________