{ title: 'The Spectrum (Buffalo, N.Y.) 1955-current, January 24, 1979, Page 10, Image 10', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about NYS Historic Newspapers - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-24/ed-1/seq-10/png/', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-24/ed-1/seq-10.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-24/ed-1/seq-10/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-24/ed-1/seq-10/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
Image provided by: University at Buffalo
I editorial * ‘V* . . 'Sftdd to Th« Sptemtm ■'****-*”** CO«k implicitly supporting, ttat violated *U the principles th educational system stand* f«. The action taken by (Wisconsin symbolic, yet financially, insipiificant Stock relinquishment by Wisconsin is threat to the system of apartheid or the' supporting it, but it does lend mora those who would like to get the movt again thi« spring. The ultimate victory in Wisconsin by financially insignificant and partial d Smith and Oberlin Colleges And Colui announced last June that the univ« withdraw holdings in companies that “ manner manifesting indifference thr< ommission, to the prevailing repressive i in South Africa.” t 1 Waste w«p At this time last year two seeds of political movements sprouted - one blossomed into victory, the other was killed by the summer heat. The Shah of Iran eventually fell to the victorious opposition led by Ayatollah Khomeini, while the anti-apartheid movement in the United States - led by student and religious leaders - pathetically wilted away. Student and faculty groups at Ivy League and other prestigious universities protested heavily and consistently last spring against university trustees’ investment in U.S. corporations opertaing in South Africa — a nation where racism is legal and systematic. The noise on college campuses started on the West Coast this time last year. The swelling interest made it appear that te mild uproar could only get stronger. There can be no question about the hazards of nuclear-generated radioactivity. Whether the substances remain lethal for 250,000 or 2 million years, as scientists continually debate, remains immaterial if we care about the planet we are leaving to our descendants. In this country’s haste to develop and implement the clean energy “solution” to the world’s dwindling coal and oil supplies, the matter of deadly waste products was virtually ignored. Anti- Presently, about 12 percent of U.S. electricity is nuclear generated. Because what goes in must come out, over 25,000 tons of radioactive wastes will be sitting monstrously in our laps by the mid-1980s. apartheid Massive demonstrations No political purity In other words, divestment was prt trustees recognized social irresponsib affiliates and subsidiaries of the cor which Columbia had -invested. Stui attacked the decision. It contains loopht After sporadic anti-apartheid protests in the last dozen years, the movement began to solidify late last spring when two demonstrations led to mass arrests. Stanford University hosted a conference resulting in the arrest of 298 students and a University of California at Berkeley sit-in led to 58 arrests. The west coast activity spread to campuses here in the East, bringing back memories of the anti-war movement. In early May, 1000 students marched at Columbia University in New York protesting its holdings in 44 American companies ope ratine in South Africa. That demonstration brought back fears of the violence that ripoed through university campuses in the sixties. Later that month, 5000 students conferred at Harvard then marched onto the Cambridge campus protesting the same issue. Organized anti-apartheid movements were welling simultaneously at Princeton, Yale, Duke, and the University of Massachusetts. Now is the time to voice opposition to the spread of nuclear power, when Federal, State and local officials are sensitive to the issue; now, before the U.S. commitment to nuclear power becomes insurmountable; now, while time and money for the development of alternative energy systems are still available. move dies tfstees to retain existing investments reporter David Rosenberg of the Col Spectator. The resolution includes b giving trustees freedom to reject pi virtually any divesting action. Banks m< “announce their intention” to cease le South African government, - and O continue to hold on to their securities in those banks. quietly on U.S. The public’s voice has been recognized and respected, as evidenced by current legislation in seven states banning permanent nuclear waste disposal sites. The New York State Federal Repository Bill, which would ban the siting, construction, or operation of any permanent nuclear waste repository within the State is a crucial piece of legislation because the Federal government is eying the defunct nuclear plant site at West Valley for terminal storage purposes. campuses Eight months after the Columbia n university has made no divestment m trustees joined a consortium that information on companies operatinj Africa,” Jim Schachter, another Specti pointed out. He also mentioned that foolish to anticipate any divestiture a< part of the board. West Valley is 35 miles southeast of Buffalo We fully support the anti-nuclear,' environmental and political forces behind this bill and urge that New York State join California, Hawaii, Montana, and the other states in keeping nuclear wasfef out of our backyards. Racist system But unlike the Ayatollah, anti-apatheid student leaders could hardly claim a major victory. Only one large univeristy ended up disposine of its portfolio of interests in companies operating in the racist republic. The University of Wisconsin confirmed last May that it sold $800,000 worth of the controversial Organized activity “The kind of (political) purity whi Princeton trustees argued, “is not attai by selling stock in those companies will Should all 50 states vote to ban repositories the nuclear industry would drown in its own waste. \ by Denise Stumpo Managing Editor nuclea late 1 The “clean” energy option continues to gain a dirty reputation. Mounting alarm over the health hazards of radioactivity and over the extant tons of permanently lethal wastes have led to legislation barring nuclear waste disposal in seven states. New York and a dozen others are now on the verge of similar action. Labor unions, such as the United Auto Workers and International Association of Machinists have proclaimed their anti-nuclear, pro-solar energy stands. Whv? Low technology solar power is labor, intensive; whereas nuclear energy, requiring more materials, is capital intensive. The churches have for the most part also pledged to fight the jspread of nuclear technology, which more and more citizens are beginning to realize, is inextricably woven within the nuclear arms race. constn billion govern Conflii cinche seems sembla supplie Nuclear U.S. electric utilities, confused by the government’s oscillating energy policies and the soaring costs of constructing and maintaining safe nuclear facilities, virtually stopped buying reactors in 1978. An order for two reactors from Illinois’ Commonwealth Edison in mid-December was the first domestic business the U.S. nuclear industry had seen in <6 months. procei report; Ameri U.S. ai energy in 1978: Stifled, industi been g of the preside Admin in Eng point reproc makini Leaps and error bounds But the nuclear industry and its closely-tied regulatory and promotional agencies, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (both spinoffs of the defunct Atomic Energy Commission) have risen above dire predictions and anti-nuke pickets. Ever so staunch, they preach the dangers of sulphur dioxide poisoning from coal fuel and point to conclusive studies on nuclear safety. (nuclear] inustry.” Wan Y. Chon, director of UB’s Nuclear Science and Technology Facility (reactor), feels that the NRC statement was exaggerated and sensationalized by the media. Chon had previously referred this reporter to the Rasmussen study as proof of nuclear reactor safety. Chon, a nuclear physicist, states that he still endorses the study, despite the NRC’s statement. suspended, yet struggling That’s why everyone was stunned last Friday when the NRC announced a withdrawal of major support for its own Reactor Safety Study. Also known as the Rasmussen studv, after its director, the report had concluded in 1975 that the probability of a serious nuclear accident (one causing 1000 or more deaths) was once in a million years — as remote as that of a meteor strike. The figures in question were based on a method known as fall-tree analysis. Chon explained, by which the probability of an event is arrived at by computing probabilities of several other events, “There is no clear cut figure,” he related. “Qualitatively, Rasmussen’s study is correct, unless the error factor is 10,000. The nuclear reactor is safe.” Speculating on what pronpted the NRC review of the study. Chon remarked, “Anti-nuclear pressure on NRC has been very heavy and I fear they have been almost excessively sensitive to such pressure.” An Although the NRC did not totally disavow the $3 million Rasmussen study, it did reject the layman’s summary, which it said may have left the reader with “misplaced confidence in the validity of the risk estimates and a more favorable impression of reactor risks in , comparison with other risks that were warranted by the study.” The study’s bounds of error, the NRC stated Friday, have since been proven greater than previously thought No melts Last month at Idaho Falls, Idaho, the NRC checked on a test reactor’s emergency core-cooling system through simulation of a pipe rupture. According to reports, the reactor’s standby system cut in automatically in less that .02 seconds after the “accident.” Thumb and blanket The news made the front page of The New York Times two days in a row. The paperJermed the NRC ruling “a serious blow to nuclear energy.” One top nuclear expert was quoted as saying that the Rasmussen study had been “a very warm security blanket for the Though a nuclear reactor melt-down has yet to occur, unexpected leaks, dents and corrosion are not-uncoirmon. Overall, nuclear power plants generate only about 60 percent of their capacity, due to long outages for refueling, repairs, inspections and, modifications required by stiffening federal safety requirements. comm infoi
