The conservatives of chancellor-in-waiting Angela Merkel and the Social Democrats (SPD) are in talks to forge a power-sharing alliance that should be in place by the end of November.

The former election rivals have made steady progress on a series of issues, from budgetary policy to renewable energy, but the future of atomic power seems set to be a key battlefield in the coming weeks.

"The lifetime of nuclear power stations cannot be extended," SPD chairman Franz Muentefering told Bild am Sonntag newspaper in an interview to be published on Sunday.

The SPD and their former government partners, the Greens, pushed through a law in 2000 to phase out Germany’s 17 atomic energy plants by 2020.

However, the conservatives are keen to provide Germany, a large importer of oil and gas, greater energy security and allow industry to earn more by extending the life of their plants.

The conservative premier of Baden-Wuerttemberg, Guenther Oettinger, said in a guest commentary in Bild am Sonntag that energy firms would then have more time to boost renewables.

"At least in the next four years, no secure and economic nuclear power station should be taken off the network," he said, while acknowledging that nuclear-free energy was something to wish for.

SPD environment expert Hermann Scheer told Handelsblatt his party could not vote for any extension, arguing energy firms would simply seek further extensions later.

Working group talks are to resume next week.

Nuclear power, which became extremely unpopular in Europe after the 1986 Chernobyl accident, has been making a comeback. The first new nuclear plant on the continent in years is being built in Finland.

One of the reasons for its return to favour is the fact that nuclear reactors emit virtually no greenhouse gases.

Linking the nation’s uranium exports to international strategies to combat global warming, the Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer has revealed politically contentious plans to boost Australia’s uranium exports.
Any sales would have to meet rules that the radioactive material only be used for civilian projects under the gaze of the international atomic energy watchdog and could not be re-exported.

"Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam are also considering the possibility of nuclear power. These countries could become markets for Australian uranium, provided bilateral safeguards agreements were concluded with them," he says.

The Foreign Minister has used a submission to a parliamentary inquiry into the strategic importance of uranium resources to confirm Australia remains committed to exporting uranium to China.

Any exports would be under a safeguards agreement, and to give strong and unqualified endorsement to nuclear energy as a legitimate tool to lower greenhouse gas emissions.

"Nuclear energy can be expected to have an important place in meeting future energy needs over the next few decades," Mr Downer says.

"From this, it is apparent that Australia’s uranium holdings are an internationally strategic resource which can only grow in significance.

"Since the whole world stands to benefit from the important issue of global warming, including through policies which give a significant place to nuclear energy, then development of this strategic resource is clearly consistent with our national and international interests."

Mr Downer’s submission puts no caveats on the idea of developing a nuclear power industry in Australia. But last night, Mr Downer’s office denied that his comments represented broad-ranging endorsement for a nuclear power industry for Australia.

"His comments were expressed in the context of developments in the global industry," Mr Downer’s spokesman said.

Mr Downer’s strong endorsement of expanding the uranium sector in Australia backs other bullish comments in recent times from the Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane and the Finance Minister Nick Minchin.

Labor is also shifting ground on the issue of uranium mining, with pressure from the South Australian Government to scrap the 20-year-old three-mines policy which restricts uranium production to only three sites.

Labor’s leader Kim Beazley and resources spokesman Martin Ferguson have endorsed the Government’s plans to export uranium to China.

The mining sector is using the current parliamentary inquiry to run a strong campaign to scrap the state bans on uranium mining and to create a nationally consistent framework to allow Australia to chase high world prices.

The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, which runs Australia’s only nu?lear reactor, has also told the inquiry that exporting uranium helps deal with global warming.

"Because nuclear power emits virtually no greenhouse gases, Australia’s uranium exports reduce global greenhouse gas emissions at the present time," ANSTO says.

"Further development and export of uranium will prevent additional emissions of greenhouse gases if used in new nuclear plants," it says.

A nuclear power plant hasn’t been built in the United States in two decades, but that could change in the next few years after a consortium announced locations in six states as possible sites for a nuclear renaissance.

Nuclear power consortium NuStart Energy on Thursday named the sites from which it will later pick two for which to apply for licenses to build and operate nuclear power plants.

Four of the six already house operating nuclear power plants. The sites, by location, are:

Scottsboro, Ala. The Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, an unfinished site owned by the U.S. government’s Tennessee Valley Authority.
Port Gibson, Miss. The Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, owned by Entergy.
St. Francisville, La. The River Bend Station, owned by Entergy.
Aiken, S.C. The Savannah River Site, a U.S. Department of Energy nuclear weapons lab.
Lusby, Md. The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant, owned by Constellation Energy.
Oswego, N.Y. The Nine Mile Point plant, owned by Constellation Energy.
All six sites chosen by NuStart are owned either by a consortium member or by the Department of Energy.

The consortium, which hopes to work on two advanced plant designs, said it expects to name the two finalists by October

Global warming advantage
The last license to result in the construction and operation of a new nuclear plant in the United States was issued in 1973.

The U.S. nuclear industry has been virtually frozen since the accident at Three Mile Island in 1979, the worst nuclear accident in U.S. history. No company has followed through with plans to build a new nuclear plant since the accident.

However, President Bush has backed renewed construction of nuclear plants as part of his energy policy.

And, in an indication of a possible shift in public opinion, a few environmentalists have said they are willing to revisit nuclear power because, unlike fossil fuel, it doesn’t produce emissions tied to global warming.

In addition, designs for new generation plants include smaller reactors that create less radioactive waste.

75 factors to be weighed
NuStart President Marilyn Kray said the four sites with operating power plants have the ?most comprehensive licensing basis,? and the five sites housing power plants have the benefit of established transmission systems.

The consortium will evaluate the sites on 75 factors including seismic activity, availability of water and emergency preparedness issues.

It is also sending letters to state and local politicians and development leaders to determine what incentives they might offer to attract t?e plant.

Kray said Nustart is not particularly worried about protests from environmental activists at the local level, but does expect some resistance from environmentalists on the national level.

The NuStart consortium consists of nine utilities, including Exelon, Entergy, and Duke Energy, as well as nuclear reactor manufacturers GE Energy, a unit of General Electric, and Westinghouse Electric Co., a unit of BNFL Plc. (GE is a parent in the joint venture that owns MSNBC.)

Under the Department of Energy?s Nuclear 2010 program, half of the estimated $520 million cost of the project is being shouldered by the Energy Department and half will be paid by the consortium members.

The consortium expects to apply for licenses in 2008. Construction could then begin in 2010 with completion in 2014, NuStart said.

France’s Court of Accounts, which oversees the finances of public bodies and state-owned enterprises, said in a controversial report published on Wednesday that debt- laden EDF had only what it termed an "embryo" of the money needed to keep nuclear sites safe once they are taken out of service in future decades.

EDF is the world’s single largest producer of nuclear energy, which provides the bulk of France’s electricity supplies, and is due for partial privatisation this year.

It has spent heav?ly on a series of acquisitions abroad in recent years, eating up finances that are also heavily strained by future obligations of a generous staff pension scheme.

The Court of Accounts said EDF’s preparations for nuclear decommissioning were marked by a lack of clearly formalised rules and raised concerns that the cost of safeguarding nuclear installations would fall on future consumers or the state.

It also criticised what it called a lack of transparency in EDF’s financial accounting.

EDF declined to comment on the report other than to say it had been setting aside cash to help pay for costs to clean up nuclear waste.

"EDF has always integrated in the kilowatt-per-hour price the financial effort needed for long-term management of waste and for the dismantling of power stations," a spokesman for EDF said.

"Provisions amount to nearly 25 billion euros ($32.5 billion), besides 2.3 billion euros have already been set aside for funds that cover future nuclear waste costs," he added.

The long-term management of nuclear waste will be treated by EDF Chairman Pierre Gadonneix on Feb. 3 at a parliamentary hearing to evaluate scientific and technological issues, he said.

"We need to do something that even dwarfs the Manhattan project," Frist told the World Economic Forum in Davos. The Manhattan project was the codename for the United States’s World War Two effort to devise an atomic weapon.

"The greatest existential threat we have in the world today is biological. Why? Because unlike any other threat it has the power of panic and paralysis to be global."

He predicted that the world would experience another bioweapon attack within the next decade, following the limited casualties seen when anthrax was sent through the US mail system in 2001.

Next time, the death rate could be a much, much higher, said Massachusetts Insitute of Technology Professor John Deutch.

An attack using the smallpox virus is overwhelmingly the largest risk, he believes.

The disease was officially eradicated three decades ago but Deutch said it was possible former Soviet stocks were still at large or even that small quantities could be extracted from graves.

"Every country has a vulnerability here," he said.

VACCINE

In a bid to protect citizens, the US government has ordered millions of doses of smallpox vaccine as part of a wide- ranging security drive in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

Other governments are also following suit in stocking up on smallpox shots.

But experts warned that other avenues were open to would- be terrorists, with diseases such as plague and Ebola haemorrhagic fever virus options for weaponisation.

More worryingly still, sophisticated groups might in the future use genetic engineering to produce hybrid microbes against which there are no defences.

Francis Collins, director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute, said such developments raised the question of whether there should be restrictions on publication of some scientific research in biology.

Physicists are already limited from sharing information on atomic weapons technology.

Collins said openness was the best strategy but he suggested there could be specific information about protocols used to create dangerous super-bugs that might, in future, be classified.

The proposed Subpart I was contained in a larger rulemaking first published in April 2002 that was intended to make NRC regulations on the transportation of radioactive materials compatible with international standards set by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). That rule was issued as a final rule in January 2004 (and became effective Oct. 1, 2004), without Subpart I.

Subpart I would have created a new type of package certification, Type B(DP), for casks used for storage
and transportation of spent nuclear fuel. It would have authorized holders of Type B(DP) certificates to make some non-safety-related changes to the package design and procedures without NRC approval under certain conditions. There is a similar authority in NRC regulations for non-safety-related changes to storage casks.

The NRC received several public comments on the proposed Subpart I and in a public workshop on the proposal held in April 2004. Several cask vendors and certificate holders said the proposal would impose significant regulatory costs and burdens. In addition, some non-safety-related changes to transport cask designs are already authorized under current NRC regulations.

2005 also marks the 20th anniversary of the bombing of our flagship, the first Rainbow Warrior, by agents of the French government in Auckland Harbour, New Zealand. The ship had been preparing a campaign against French nuclear weapons testing.

The threat of a nuclear weapon actually being used is today perhaps greater than ever. Nuclear warheads lie in insecure warehouses in Russia, weapons grade plutonium transits the planet, and nuclear power plants keep the deadly fuel cycle which feeds weapons systems alive. George Bush openly talks about plans for smaller, "more usable" nuclear weapons. For violent extremists of every ilk, a nuclear weapon is the ultimate prize.

We’re looking for people who want to carry on the campaign against nuclear weapons and help us mark the 20th anniversary of the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior with renewed action against these dangerous circumstances.

All you have to do is register for the Follow the Rainbow mailing list at this special link:

[url=http://prefs.greenpeace.org/user-register/signup?register_id=1310252]http://prefs.greenpeace.org/user-register/signup?register_id=1310252[/url]

Remember to fill out the "About Me" section and your birth date when you register.

Let’s end the threat of nuclear weapons together. Follow the rainbow.

Putin, speaking to armed forces chiefs, said although international terrorism was one of Russia’s main security threats the country had also to keep its nuclear defenses in sound condition.

"We know that we have only to weaken our attention to such components of our defenses as the nuclear-missile shield, and new threats to us could appear," Itar-Tass news agency quoted him as saying. He said research and successful testing of new nuclear-missile systems technology was being conducted, informs Reuters.

Mr. Putin said it was necessary to create a legal basis for cooperation between the government and businesses in priority areas. He noted that the state should ensure stable conditions for the work of private investors. At the same time, Mr. Putin added that the private sector should not be forced to incur unreasonable expenses and costs.

In particular, the President said the government and business should cooperate in implementing large transport projects, providing electrical power and improving border infrastructure. Another priority is knowlegde-intensive industries. "Today, Russian business, with its advanced management, logistics and communication technologies, is already ahead of the state," Mr. Putin stressed. At the same time, he noted that the government should retain the right to research projects regarding new materials and products, reports Gateway 2 Russia.

Please view chart at [url=http://www.cenn.org/info/Atomstopp]http://www.cenn.org/info/Atomstopp[/url] Calculations 0712.doc for the exact amount of required signatures per country (thanks to NOAH Denmark for the original workout of the chart!).

Dear friends,

More than 100.000 signatures have been recorded on the website of the European Petition by now. From phone calls and emails we know that there are another ten thousands of signatures still at organizations all over Europe or by now already on its way to Linz.

More than 100.000 signatures are collected by now, which is great! But one tenth is not enough – unfortunately.

To reach our goal of 1 million signatures it is necessary to bring all our efforts together and focus on the European Petition to accelerate the progress. In some countries the campaign is not that successful and it is important to do a lot of campaigning in order to catch up.

In Austria we were already able to collect more than fifty percent of the required signatures!!

As supporters of the European Petition we ask you urgently to
o Have eye-catching links to (http://www.atomstopp.at/1million/ at your website
o To promote the European Petition among other much visited websites and ask for linking to those
o Send information on the European Petition out to all your available email-addresses, friends and people you know and ask for signatures and for further distribution of the information
o Publish the European Petition and signature lists in your organisations newspaper or ask other organizations in your country if they could publish it
o Collect signatures on places with high frequency of people coming by (or at demonstrations, trade fairs, events,…)
o If you have contact-addresses to other Europeans available, please also forward link and information on European Petition and ask for circulation
o Email us good ideas on how to further promote the European Petition in order to reach our goal

According to the motto "together we are strong" and in order to reach our goal it is very necessary that we all combine our efforts and work actively for the success of the European Petition.

This way it will be possible to reach our common goal – The European Exit from nuclear energy!

Thanks to all who already have worked actively on promoting the European Petition!

But Britain was adamant its proposed Nuclear Decommissioning Agency (NDA) would not contravene EU rules, and said it would ensure the agency had the funds needed to dismantle power stations and clean up the country’s nuclear liabilities.

Greenpeace said it expected the EU executive Commission to open a formal investigation on Wednesday into the agency, which will from next April assume all the assets and liabilities of state-owned nuclear firm British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL). Continue reading →