Pollution Permanent Monitoring Panel – 2012 Annual Report World Federation of Scientists -August 23, 2012 Seminar, Erice, Italy

Chairman: Lorne G. Everett, PhD, DSc.

President & CEO

L. Everett & Associates, LLC

3700 State Street, Suite 350

Santa Barbara Ca 93105

Phone (805) 880-9301 Cell (805) 680-7285

Leverett@everettassociates.net; www.everettassociates.net

The Pollution Permanent Monitoring Panel Activities for 2012 included:

· Pollution PMP August 19 Meeting

· 4 Pollution PMP Papers and Reports

· 4 Centre Proposals and 3 Session themes , 2013

· Joint PMP Meeting with Terrorism Panel on Water

· Joint Plenary Session with Terrorism Panel: Water, Pollution and Terrorism

The four new Centre Proposals under preparation for 2012 include:

· Hardening Water Infrastructure Against Terrorism

· Hydraulic Fracturing Soil Gas Impacts

· Encouraging Global Cooperation on Spent Fuel Management

· A Non-Proliferating Fuel Cycle Approach

In 2013 the proposed Pollution Panel sessions include:

· Innovative Cleanup Technologies

· Nanotechnologies Environmental Applications

· Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs) and Drugs in Water: A Terrorism Concern

Hardening Water Infrastructure against Terrorism Proposal

Terrorist attacks on water infrastructure play only a minor, but important, role in global water problems. Far more lives can be saved with the provision of clean water and clean sanitary facilities than by frustrating attacks on water infrastructure. Equally, equitable division of available water can resolve political and social problems to a greater extent than avoidance of terrorist attacks. We have discussed these issues in earlier meetings of the World Federation of Scientists. However, terrorist attacks on water infrastructures are important and can cause severe public reaction and chaos.

“Those who know do not predict. Those who predict do not know”. Lao Tzu-6th century BC. However, other options, such as black boxes or crones on three legged stools at Delphi, are less useful than predictions. How to prepare for terrorist attacks on water infrastructure systems? In the Black Swan, Nassim N. Taleb suggests that we prepare to repair the effects of unexpected events as we cannot predict what these events are and when they will occur. However, we all know that it is better to prevent such potential events. That is a difficult task.

We do know that terrorists want to instill fear. They want to see blood and bodies. Most predictable attacks on water infrastructures do not do this. This does not mean that such attacks will not occur. We can also assume that such attacks will be on major cities and/or iconic facilities such as the White House, Pentagon, etc. Therefore, the targets that need to be hardened are limited. We also know that we could limit damage to water supplies in iconic building by such relatively easy, but not necessarily inexpensive measures as providing holding tanks at such sites and testing the water before it is allowed into the building. One could also limit the size of such tanks by installing drinking water only pipelines.

Natural and human generated disruptions of water supplies have occurred such as in Katrina and Fukushima. In the event of a disruption in service in major cities, one could take advantage of the large stock of bottled water in the homes, stores, warehouses etc. until clean water supplies can be restored. Rationing of the supplies could result in a more equitable distribution of supplies.

Studies have been made of the cities and buildings most likely to be attacked. However, to our knowledge, the engineering needed and the costs to harden water supplies for iconic buildings and to provide drinking water only pipes have not been studied. Further, the externalities such as the value of having secured water supplies in iconic buildings have not been studied. Such studies would be valuable in determining whether hardening of water supplies is feasible.

Various attack scenarios as noted below were presented at the meetings.

Inferential monitoring as noted below appears to be the most viable choice to protect buildings, however these indirect measurements are deemed to provide only limited protection at this stage.

Toxicity MonitoringMulti-Parameter Monitoring

Examples, as noted below, were given relative to how fast an attack on a city’s water supply will kill 1000’s of people:

A Proposal for Soil Gas Monitoring In Shale-Gas Regions in Europe

Background conditions

· Soil gas anomalies due to geologic structure

· Shale-Gas Exploration

· Relation between groundwater dissolved chemistry and soil gas

 

Methodology – Situate soil gas monitoring above yet close to the groundwater table. Monitor soil gas and environmental parameters over time and relate to environmental or human variables.

Site selections

· Shale-Gas regions - To Be Determined

Background sites (5-10)

· No historic or active shale-gas drilling

· No near future drilling plans (NY state, or other locations with moratoria or bans)

· Geologic Structure (2-5)

· Fault zones

· Anticline/syncline regions (highly fractured)

· Where exploration is presently permitted

· No existing evidence of soil gas anomalies

· Shale-gas exploration (4-8)

· Where exploration is presently permitted

· No existing evidence of soil gas anomalies

· No Existing wells, however wells planed in near horizon (1-3 years)

Soil Gases of Interest:

· Methane (CH4)

· Ethane (C2H6)

· Propane (C3H8)

· Butane (C4H10)

· Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S)

· Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

· Nitrogen (N2)

Other monitoring variables (may need equipment in addition to Gas Clams):

· Barometric pressure

· Atmospheric pressure at monitoring location

· Groundwater level

· Temperature

· Precipitation

Soil gas monitoring equipment:

· Gas Clam

Soil gas data Collection and storage:

· Waiora

Groundwater sampling and analysis - Data Analysis:

· Simple parametric and non-parametric comparisons

· Principal component analysis

A legacy Image to Overcome!

A Proposal was submitted on Safe and Secure Management of Spent Fuel Management

In all developing countries, there is a large and growing demand for energy, and specifically for electricity. In developed countries the demand is also growing for affordable and clean electricity. Renewables such as solar, wind, geothermal and hydropower will not be able to satisfy these needs in the foreseeable future. The facts that increased use of nuclear power can not alone solve the problem, but that it must be part of the solution are also recognized. The severe reactor accident at Fukushima has led to a few nations proposing to phase out nuclear power. However, in the majority of countries, the argument for carbon free energy and the over-riding global need for secure energy sources have together maintained global interest in expanding nuclear power. The so-called “nuclear renaissance” was slowed but not stopped by Fukushima.

But extensive nuclear growth will remain wishful thinking unless some crucial requirements are satisfied. Nuclear energy production must be safe, secure and economic both at the front-end (from the mining of uranium through its enrichment to its burn up in nuclear reactors) and also at the back-end, i.e. in the waste management area. The front end issues tend to dominate the nuclear debate, most recently because of the concerns about enrichment capabilities bringing nations closer to weapons capability. However, the back end must not be neglected.

Proposal - A multiple year project at the Centre for Planetary Emergencies could contribute to ensuring that nuclear power is recognized as a sustainable energy source, whose extensive use can enhance global security and safety. A small team based at the Centre could provide invaluable scientific support and advice to those responsible for radioactive waste management in particular in the large number of developing countries that are intent on introducing nuclear power.

Each country should have a structured national strategy for managing such wastes. The Centre can provide advice and training for national experts, using input from developed nuclear nations. Some countries will decide to implement purely national facilities for managing their wastes. Even if they do so, it is a global concern that these facilities are well engineered and operated in a way to minimized hazards. Experience has shown that nuclear accidents of any kind, in any land – even if the direct consequences are localized - can have a global impact on the acceptability of nuclear power, and hence a global impact on the environment. The expertise available at the Centre can help ensure that national facilities are indeed state-of-the-art.

Ultimately, however, highly hazardous spent nuclear fuel containing fissile plutonium should not end up in numerous, scattered locations around the globe as more and more nations, both large and small, contemplate expanding or introducing nuclear power. Fewer, safely constructed and well secured storage and disposal facilities must be the goal. The key challenge in this regard is the siting and construction of deep geological repositories for long-lived radioactive wastes. These repositories are expensive; even the smallest state-of-the-art deep facilities for high level radioactive wastes (HLW) or spent fuel will cost several billion dollars.

Many small nuclear programs, or countries starting out in nuclear, do not have the technical and/or financial resources to implement a national repository in a timely fashion. They will have to keep their spent fuel in interim storage facilities; this could result in numerous sites all around the world, at each of which hazardous materials will be stored for decades to hundreds of years. One safer and more secure option would be for nuclear fuel suppliers to take back the spent fuel under a leasing arrangement and add it to their own larger stocks, which would be stored for later reprocessing and recycling into new fuels. However, although there is fierce competition among nuclear suppliers to provide reactors, fuels and reprocessing services, there are as yet no offers to take back fuel. The "take-back" options that have offered by Russia are exclusively for Russian fuel - and the concept in any case covers only new fuel supplied and not the extensive further inventories of radioactive waste that must be disposed of in geological repositories.

The most promising option that remains open for small and new nuclear power programs is to collaborate with similarly positioned countries in efforts to implement shared, multi-national repositories. Most credible is the cooperation of geographically contiguous or close nations in the scope of regional repository projects. The national advantages in sharing technology and in benefiting financially due to the economies of scale in repository implementation are obvious. The global safety and security benefits in helping all nations have earlier access to state-of-the-art repositories are also clear. The big challenge, of course, is in achieving public and political acceptance in the repository host countries.

Over the past few years, significant progress in this direction has been made in the SAPIERR project (acronym for “Strategic Action Plan for Implementation of European Regional Repositories”). The Project, originally conceived by the not-for-profit Arius Association and funded by the European Commission, has carried out a range of studies that lay the groundwork for serious multinational negotiations on the establishment of one or more shared repositories in Europe. The studies (all available on the web-site www.sapierr.net) have looked at legal and liability issues, organizational forms, economic aspects, safety and security issues and public involvement challenges. Based on these studies, a Working Group with representatives of around 10 EU Member States have established of a Working Group for a European Repository Development Organization (ERDO-WG). The European Commission has issued legislation which makes feasible the implementation of shared European repositories and proposals for setting up a formal ERDO, domiciled in an EU Member State.

By combining their resources in this way, the partners in ERDO can also demonstrate to other regions of the world the feasibility of enhancing safety and security whilst increasing the economic attractiveness of nuclear power, even for small countries. The ERDO could act as a role model for regional groupings elsewhere. The Arab States have recently made clear that they intend to introduce nuclear power, and that the will to do so collaboratively. Other world regions with potential regional groupings are in Central and South America, Asia and Africa. Several countries in such regions have expressed interest in the regional repository concept and some have already attended relevant meetings on the topic. With funding from US charitable Foundations, Arius is currently promoting regional storage and disposal concepts in the Arabian Gulf and in South East Asia.

A Centre for the Study of Planetary Emergencies could include a project on the safe and secure long-term management of nuclear materials from nuclear applications. A program extending over around 5 years, utilizing some staff based at the Centre and drafting in external experts for specific studies could help advance global technical and societal preparations for extended use of nuclear power.

An inaugural workshop on the topic could attract participants from the ERDO-WG countries, further European States and also from the UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Iran, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, South Africa, Namibia, Nigeria, Ghana, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and Chile. All of these are interested in introducing or expanding nuclear power programs.

Further interest in such a Workshop could be expected from the large nuclear supplier countries. These should be concerned that back-end solutions are made available to small countries where they are promoting nuclear power and selling nuclear materials. The Workshop could perhaps initiate dialogue between small nuclear user countries that are being asked to forego certain rights that they have under the NPT and the potential large service providers that may be prepared to help with customers with back-end solutions if this increases commercial opportunities without raising concerns about global security.

Subsequently, the Centre could support studies and dialogue workshops on the safety, security, economic and political risks associated with managing global inventories of hazardous radioactive materials that must be stored for long times before ultimately being disposed of in deep geological repositories – a step which is agreed to be the only feasible permanent solution. The major lessons learned from past attempts at resolving these issues made it clear that repository site locations and technologies such as represented below will not be a part of the discussions.

The PCE Challenge

The First Pollution PMP Contaminant (see below) Discussed was Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) 24 years ago in Erice. This year we wish to recommend that in 2013 the Pollution Panel focus on “Innovative cleanup technologies”.

When I first came to Erice we felt that DNAPL (Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquids/PCE) could not be cleaned up however as has been shown at the Interagency Government Test site at the Kennedy Space Centre below, DNAPL site can now be remediated by several new technologies.

Lauch Complex 34, Cape Canaveral, Florida

One of the emerging areas of environmental need is soil gas investigations relative to vapor intrusion risk as noted below:

As Chairman of ASTM International D 18.21.02, I have been very active in developing soil gas monitoring systems for the past 20 years. The list of the soil gas standards developed to date are provided below.

American Society for Testing and Materials International Chairman, L. Everett, ASTM D18.21.02

· D5314-92 (2006) Standard Guide for Soil Gas Monitoring in the Vadose Zone

· D7758 (2012)  Practice For Passive Soil Gas Sampling in the Vadose Zone for Source Identification, Spatial Variability Assessment, Monitoring, and Vapor Intrusion Evaluations

· D7648 (2012) Practice For Active Soil Gas Sampling for Direct Push or Manual-Driven Hand-Sampling Equipment

· D7663 (2012) Practice for Active Soil Gas Sampling in the Vadose Zone for Vapor Intrusion Evaluations

· International Dynamic Soil Gas Monitoring Symposium including Methane risk, Jacksonville, Florida January 2013. Chairman Lorne Everett

One of the proposed innovative technologies for 2013 is Environmental Nanotechnology Applications. The session will include discussions of:

· Remediation of contaminated groundwater using nanoparticles containing zero-valent iron is one of the most prominent examples of a rapidly emerging technology with considerable potential benefits.

· One of the main environmental applications of nanotechnology is in the water sector. As freshwater sources become increasingly scarce due to overconsumption and contamination, scientists have begun to consider seawater as another source for drinking water. The majority of the world’s water supply has too much salt for human consumption and desalination is an option but expensive method for removing the salt to create new sources of drinking water. Carbon nanotube membranes have the potential to reduce desalination costs.

· Nanofilters can be used to remediate or clean up ground water or surface water contaminated with chemicals and hazardous substances. Nanosensors could be developed to detect waterborne contaminants

The operating size range of these nano particles is provided in the figure below and shows that the range is approximately the same as the pollution molecule.

Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (Edcs) and Drugs in Water

Another of the themes for 2013 includes endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and drugs in water: A Bioterrorism Concern, 2013. Topics to be addressed include:

· EDCs act via receptors at very low doses (at and below one part per trillion).

· EDCs are easily obtained by terrorists.

· They are not being routinely monitored.

· Remediation technology is not yet in place.

· The cost of responding to the loss of a major source of drinking water would be enormous.

· Many diseases are increased by exposure to very low doses of EDCs, and damage is transmitted to future generations.

The final proposal submitted for consideration in 2013 is a feasibility study to address a Non-Proliferating Fuel Cycle-No Enrichment, Reprocessing or Accessible Spent Fuel. The topic will include discussions of:

· The non-proliferating system of uranium from the sea, (no mining or milling), use of Candu type reactors (no enrichment) and no reprocessing –infinite supplies of uranium from the oceans (no plutonium or high level waste streams) and no land based disposal of radioactive wastes (disposed of in sub-seabed sediments) removes many objections. CO2 now allowed to be disposed in sub-seabed sediments. Spent fuel would be sent by barge or ship to U.S. Naval Reactor Shipyards for storage and staging for disposal. Such sites have most of the equipment and security needed . All of these systems have been carried out at commercial or pilot stage facilities.

· Of course, all these comments are assertions. Modeling and pilot testing need to be carried out to verify these claims and determine the costs. In addition, the environmental impact, including embedded emissions-emissions associated with making, installing, maintaining and decommissioning the facilities and equipment- must also be calculated. Then, the feasibility of the non-proliferating fuel cycle can be determined.

The 2012 Pollution PMP Meeting Participants and Contributors included the following:

Dr. Lorne G. Everett- L. Everett & Associates, USA

Distinguished Professor Frank L. Parker- Vanderbilt Univ. USA

Professor Fred vam Saal- University of Missouri, USA

Professor Stephano Parmiagiano- University of Parma, Italy

Dr. Franco M. Buonaguro- Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Napoli, Italy

Dr. Dan J. Kroll- Hach Homeland Security Technologies, USA

Dr. Walter M. Grayman - Consulting Engineer, USA

Dr. Richard Rigaini—LLNL-Retired, USA

Dr. Gina Marie Calderone—ECC, USA

Dr. Charles McCombie-AEGIS, Switzerland

Dr. Thomas Ballestero, UNH, USA