Archive for June, 2011

Injustice to Nuclear Veterans – Dosimetry Report, Alan Batchelor

June 29, 2011

Flag this message
Fw: DOSIMETRY REPORT
Wednesday, 29 June, 2011 4:13 PM
From:
“Alan Batchelor”
Add sender to Contacts
To:
“Meaghan Partridge”
Message contains attachments
1 File (48KB)

* Index My Statement.docIndex My Statement.doc

Dear Ms Partridge

Thank you for passing on the CEO’s comments in your email of 14 June. He does not seem to have extrapolated the results of the high doses of radiation, such as those recorded at Nagasaki and Hiroshima, to the low levels of radiation inferred by others. The answers appear to be constrained by a continuation of past political, commercial and compensation requirements.

The statement that ‘”detailed advice on these work programs was provided to the study by those with first hand knowledge including yourself,” lacks research.

Below are two emails describing errors in this statement:

* The second identifies my comments on Volume 1 – Dosimetry, when it was sprung unannounced on the Consultative Forum. There was unacceptable time for comment and little opportunity, for many years, for input by the Consultative Forum;
* The first is the reaction by Dr Jack Lonergan. He was a former defence scientist and was representing the RAAF on the Consultative Forum.

All the best
Alan Batchelor

From: Jack Lonergan
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 11:39 AM
To: Alan Batchelor ; Chris Clarke ; Rob Robotham ; Richie Gun ; Mike Carter ; Wilson, Eileen ; Johnson, Mark ; ‘Lyons, Beth’ ; Lynch, Leanne ; Baxter, Jan ; AVADSC ; ‘Alex O’Shea (CF – Comcare)’ ; Spiers, Carolyn ; Small, Allison ; ‘RSL NHQ’ ; ‘Ron Usher’ ; Ric Johnstone ; Ray Spring ; ‘Peter Cooke-Russell (CF)’ ; ‘Mike Dowsett (CF)’ ; Lewis Rice ; ‘Lance Halvorson’ ; Keith Horsley ; ‘John Rice (for Lewis – CF)’ ; Devlin, Helen ; Charles Whiting ; Bruce Armstrong ; Barry Telford ; Ann Munslow-Davies ; Allistair Leahy
Cc: Bruce Billson
Subject: Re: DOSIMETRY REPORT

Dear All,

Alan has compiled a devastating commentary on this study, from its genesis, through its management, and on to its implementation.

Unless the project manager can mount an effective rejoinder, the Secretary of DVA will need to consider whether the whole project should get a re-run under a manager with the competence necessary to understand and control its many facets.
+
I will be forwarding a commentary on the scientific integrity of the dosimetry draft per se. As such, my remarks will be complementary to Alan’s but not covering the contextual and health territories traversed by him.

Since I did not receive a copy of the draft till Good Friday I will be constrained to putting as much together as I can by 26 April on which date I shall e-mail what I have.

My copy of the mortality/cancer study reached me on 20 April.

Circulation of these reports for consideration on 27 April is an absolute disgrace and an insult to the organisations that many of us represent.

In the time I have been associated with this study I have been consistently amazed at Alan’s unmatched grasp of the issues involved, at his dedication to see that the interests of the participants are served, and at his persistence in the face of Departmental indifference and/or ignorance.

We are all very much in Alan’s debt for speaking out as he has and for doing the extraordinary amount of work that enables him consistently to put his money where his mouth is.

Yours sincerely

Jack Lonergan

—– Original Message —–

From: Alan Batchelor
To: Chris Clarke ; Rob Robotham ; Richie Gun ; Mike Carter ; Wilson, Eileen ; Johnson, Mark ; ‘Lyons, Beth’ ; Lynch, Leanne ; Baxter, Jan ; AVADSC ; ‘Alex O’Shea (CF – Comcare)’ ; Spiers, Carolyn ; Small, Allison ; ‘RSL NHQ’ ; ‘Ron Usher’ ; Ric Johnstone ; Ray Spring ; ‘Peter Cooke-Russell (CF)’ ; ‘Mike Dowsett (CF)’ ; Lewis Rice ; ‘Lance Halvorson’ ; Keith Horsley ; ‘John Rice (for Lewis – CF)’ ; Jack Lonergan ; Devlin, Helen ; Charles Whiting ; Bruce Armstrong ; Barry Telford ; Ann Munslow-Davies ; Allistair Leahy
Cc: Bruce Billson
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 5:50 PM
Subject: DOSIMETRY REPORT

Dear Consultative Forum Members

Given the amount of time that the Study has been stagnating, there should have been time for some background research by Forum Members. The ability to agree or disagree with the work carried out by the Study must be of importance to the organizations that are represented on the Study. This importance increases when it is considered that the Forum’s representative on the SAC (Ann) has not been allowed to report proceedings back to the Forum and all of the Study sub-committees lack a continuing practical nuclear veteran overview. I attended two Dosimetry meetings and was no longer invited when my views on uranium, and probably beryllium, were advanced.

Because of the limited time available and the importance of the subject report, my comments in the attachment are mainly on the Dosimetry Study, but will include some of the areas of interface with the rest of the Study. I will forward my comments on the Adelaide University study if there is sufficient time.

A large proportion of my comments in the attachment have been provided previously or were contained in my documentary collection that was placed on loan to DVA and the Dosimetry Committee during a period of many months over two years ago. My comments also include references to the Royal Commission Transcript that was not in my possession at the time of the loan. The Study does not appear to have carried out any original research into the later, probably the most important document produced by the Royal Commission. Professional eye-witness accounts and AWRE Reports that have been tested in the cauldron of the Royal Commission interrogations, where many fallacies are revealed, have been totally ignored.

A DVA undertaking to a Budget Estimates hearing on 5 June 2001 stated “The Mortality and Cancer incidence study will examine the effects of the entire experience of participation in the tests.This will include the effects of radiation exposure”. Instead, the medical assessments have attempted to confine its investigations to cancer caused by ionising radiation. This confinement is slowly becoming unstuck but has a way to go, provided that the potential threat of future financial restrictions (based on political expectations) does not influence the level of study considerations.

The scope of the present Study is too narrow to fully address the health concerns of past and present nuclear veterans.

Handling the Interface

The rules used by the University of Adelaide Team in linking the names and data on the Study Roll with the functional (depersonalised) dosage assessments made by the Dosage Panel are vital to the integrity of the Study results and must be identified in detail or the results will appear to be based on guesswork.

Despite many requests, the process involved in interfacing dose categorisation with the Nominal Roll and then with the AIHW and State cancer registries remains a mystery. It is surmised that arrangements will have resulted in the return of depersonalised statistics from the Registries that were linked with a minimum of information, probably service/civilian status, rank, cancer type, dosage category and date of birth.

So far, the process described is fairly typical, but would not have taken full advantage of the work carried out by the Dosimetry Committee. If the original information was forwarded and linked with other vital information, such as ship, work locations, operations attended, similar function groupings, times of exposure, etc, that could be provided as impersonal flags and returned as simple search indicators to particular health effects and their relationship with particular events and/or locations. This opportunity for an innovative breakthrough may have disappeared, and if this assumption is correct, was caused by a lack of experience, forethought and coordination between the various planning, controlling and implementation areas involved in the Study. The work of the Dosimetry Sub-committee may have been wasted, and an opportunity to carry out a number of Case Control Studies, concerning the participants environment, on an almost no cost basis has been overlooked.

Dosage Anomalies

The study has used a rule of thumb process known as the “Rule of Seven” that states that for every seven fold increase in time, radioactivity will decrease by ten fold. An example is provided where the level falls to one thousandth after two weeks. This rule was based on a standard decay rate where it was used as an example for training, and in building theoretical models. In actual practice the decay rate is likely to be something quite different and should be determined by the isotopic composition of the matter under consideration, a figure that must be expected to vary with every shot in an experimental nuclear programme.

The inappropriateness of using this rule, without modification, is borne out by practical observations made by the Australian Health Physics Representative at Maralinga when he wrote to CXRL stating “the stuff is hanging on grimly and just won’t fade away”. The persistence of Yellow areas and the need for decontamination procedures during all stages of the Buffalo/Antler inter-trial period, and radiation survey results during the Hurricane/Mosaic inter-trial period provide practical examples of this persistence. These examples are discussed further in the attachment.

This under-estimation of dosages is reinforced when a comparison is made of the Report’s theoretical dose calculations with the practical gamma dosage records of the Joint Services Training Unit (JSTU). This unit did not enter the Hurricane Active area until 37 days after the detonation of Hurricane and were present in the Active area on 14 days over a period of 5 weeks. The recorded dose for one member of the JSTU (78.8 mSv) exceeds the theoretical dose calculated for e.g. Buffalo and Antler Engineer Groups (range from 6 to 20 mSv), whose initial entry was shortly after detonation (usually day of detonation or day after), were actively employed during the countdown and recovery periods during a period involving three or four rounds and remained working in Active areas for periods of 3 months, or in some cases, a great deal more. Not taking the employment variations into account, the theoretical calculations provide dosage estimates that are approximately 2% of the practical figures. This subject is discussed further in the attachment.

Medical Nightmare

Nuclear weapons are being treated as generalised producers of nuclear radiation that quickly dissipates from the environment. This is a simplistic viewpoint based on perceived Government policy that attempts to remain strictly within the confines of the Terms of Reference. These have obviously been written by a person who did not have a clear understanding of the undertaking made by DVA to Budget Estimates on 5 June 01, stating that the study would examine the entire experience of participation in the tests including radiation exposure. This pledge has never been publicly withdrawn by DVA or the Minister. Because of the complicated inter-relationships between the many modes of infection and vast range of detrimental health outcomes that could result from participation in a nuclear weapons test program, the constriction of the Terms of Reference to cancer and morbidity should never have been allowed to continue in its present crippled format by the DVA managers. Reinforcing this error in judgement, is the lack of time remaining for follow-on studies after a half-century of procrastination. The Prime Minister has displayed his willingness to accept an extension to a Terms of Reference in the case the Coles Enquiry into the Aaustralian Wheat Board, even to the extent of allowing himself to be questioned (Canberra Times Forum 25/2/06, page B1).

A nuclear weapon produces over 300 radioisotopes, as well as including more than 80% of the very dangerous plutonium and uranium that were present but did not take part in the fission process and other materials used in the construction of the weapon such as beryllium and aluminium. These were all vaporised in the fireball and left behind in an aerosol format. Also, these were experimental weapons, with additives being tested for scientific and military purposes,e.g. cobalt-60, thorium-228, scandium-45, highly enriched uranium, lead chromate, etc. Early tower material (iron), later tower material (aluminium) and HMS Plym were also contained within the fireball and would have been vaporised and distributed, mainly as aerosol oxides.

One of the most important health hazards resulted from the inhalation of these materials into the lung where some stay and the others seek out a particular organ or tissue. Their radioactive emissions are then concentrated within that organ where their localised effects are out of all proportion when they are compared with the diluting effect of spreading this particular dose over the whole body as is done in the Study. It is stated in the study that the dose conversion factor takes account of the organ in which the material is concentrated. Other radionuclides will not necessarily concentrate in the same organ and will therefore not affect that organ. It follows that the material isolated in one organ, and its radioactive daughters, are the only materials available to affect that organ and this will occur from Day 1. The practice of leaving such nuclides out of consideration for extended periods and until they are no longer a minor element of the overall external dose is making an invalid assessment for the range of organs that attract a particular radionuclide.

One particular example occurs when alpha producing plutonium (often described as the most dangerous substance known to man) is lodged in the bony structures surrounding the sensitive blood forming bone marrow. This situation can damage the blood producing system located in the bone marrow resulting in downgraded immune and auto-immune systems. Disorders in these systems can cause cancer, reduce the body’s ability to repel disease as well as provide an inappropriate response to a foreign substance or even the body’s own tissues. The existence of this avenue of infection has also been ignored because the majority of adverse health outcomes are not necessarily carcinogenic.

Because Depleted Uranium (DU) has a comparatively low level of radioactivity, it has been discarded from overall dosage considerations. This action has resulted from a purely dosage consideration that provides no assessment of uranium’s chemical toxicity or possibly related synergistic effects. Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) was used in large amounts in some weapons and some Minor Trials. The hundreds of times more radioactive isotopes contained in HEU have also been dropped from consideration.

The US has taken the chemically toxic characteristics of DU seriously. The US Federal Aviation Administration has produced Advisory Circular No 20-123 “Avoiding or Minimizing Encounters with Aircraft Equipped with Depleted Uranium Balance Weights during Accident Investigations” which contains the following directions:

* “The main hazard associated with DU is the harmful effect the material could have if it enters the body. If particles are inhaled or ingested, they can be chemically toxic and cause a significant and long lasting irradiation of internal tissues.”
* “On arrival at accident scenes of aircraft suspected of containing balance weights made of DU, determine if balance weights have been damaged or lost their cadmium plating coating.”
* “If it becomes necessary to handle balance weights, the following precautions should be observed:
o Personnel handling the balance weight should wear gloves.
o Industrial eye protection should be worn.
o Respirator mask should be worn to ensure no radioactive dust particle ingestion.”

In a book by the Australian Government Institute of Criminology on Wayward Governance titled “Australian Studies in Law, Crime and Justice” a study is made of breaches of law by agents of the state and the many ways in which citizens may be harmed by the actions of their government. The following are extracts from Chapter 16, “A Toxic Legacy: British Nuclear Weapons Testing in Australia” concerning the protection of the uranium industry at the expense of its relevance to the health of nuclear veterans:

* “The Fraser government, anxious to minimise embarrassment in general and to minimise any political threats to the burgeoning Australian industry in particular, quickly asked the British government to remove that plutonium which existed in a recoverable form.”
* “Committed to the continued mining and export of uranium, Australian officials were disinclined to dwell extensively on the mistakes of the past, or to highlight the risks posed by radioactive substances. Concerned about reducing government expenditure, they sought to reduce outlays for compensation. The generosity which had led previous Australian governments to spend millions of dollars to host the British tests had become a thing of the past.”

It took many years and the Navy experience with beryllium tips used in Jason Pistols, to force the Study to accept beryllium (neutron reflecting shell in nuclear weapons) as a carcinogenic substance. The diagnosis of berylliosis depends on the patient’s knowledge of an association with beryllium. Because of the strict secrecy conditions surrounding weapon components, neither the patient nor his physician would have had access to this knowledge. Similar lung diseases such as mesothelioma, sarcoidosis, pneumonia, silicosis, aluminosis, stannosis, siderosis, etc. would have been diagnosed and never associated with the nuclear tests. Chronic beryllium disease is incurable and if the lungs are severely damaged, the patient may experience fatal heart failure resulting from the strain placed on his heart, the underlying cause not being recognised on the death certificate. Death from berylliosis, that had previously been diagnosed as mesothelioma (one of the possibilities), would not have been recorded as either of these diseases before 1997 when ICD-10 coding was introduced. Where any of these diseases have occurred in nuclear veterans, its prevalence needs to be related, or not related, to operations in Active areas and suitable consideration given to the probable origin.

Paragraph 4.6 of the AWRE report R. H. Miscellaneous 2 – Protective Clothing, prepared by Capt WN Saxby, describes the use of War Department Mark VI respirators as part of the protective clothing equipment used during Operation Hurricane. It describes the container screwed to the inlet valve as “The containers carried the filtering material which was asbestos wool, acting as a particulate filter only.” It is understood that these respirators continued in use during the post Hurricane operations and during Operation Totem, and possibly in later Minor and Major trials. It is not within the competence of the Adelaide University Study team to assign a reasonable percentage of test employments to participants, one indicative case being the identification of those who would have worn respirators equipped with asbestos wool filters.

The literal interpretation of the Terms of Reference has resulted in no consideration of lung diseases, many carcinogenic, resulting from inorganic aerosols exiting the fireball. Some examples follow:

* silica drawn from the surrounding surface into the fireball when the shock wave reverses direction.
* Iron from early weapon towers and parts of HMS Plym vaporised in the fireball.
* Aluminium from later weapon towers vaporised in the fireball.
* Material such as generators, weapon assembly sheds and security fences left at the detonation site.

Genetic damage resulting in impaired fertility, miscarriages, stillbirths, deformities and future generational effects that are not necessarily carcinogenic is an area that the Government is historically unwilling to investigate. The Donovan Health Study found 48 out of 339 Australian participants reported infertility for periods over 2 years. Medical enquiries confirmed 21 of these cases, the others could not be identified or their records could not be traced. In a telegram from the UK Prime Minister’s Office to the Lord President’s Office on 16 Nov 55, it is stated “The Prime Minister saw the report from Sir Harold Himsworth about the report of the Committee considering the Genetic effects of Nuclear Radiation. His comment was:- A pity, but we cannot help it.” Sir Harold was in charge of the Medical Research Council Panel set up to assist Dr Penney in the formulation of dosage regulations for Hurricane. This attitude, condoned at the highest level, would not have placed a high priority on the radiological safety of participants.

The impact of internally produced radiation on the neurological system has been foreshadowed by the Japanese “Bura Bura” disease, related to the atom bombs detonated high over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the chronic fatigue syndrome (“Vegetative-Vascula Dystonia” and “Osteoalgetic Syndrome”) observed after Chernobyl. It has been indicated to DVA that a genetic study of NZ nuclear veterans is being conducted by the Institute of Molecular Bioscience at the Massey University. This study does not appear to hold any interest for DVA. It is understood that the Massey University has made the following strong interim recommendations resulting from their findings in the Pilot Study:

1. The nuclear test veterans be offered assistance in helping them cope with the chronic stress that at least some of them are experiencing. As long as the situation they find themselves in remains unresolved, stress levels will remain elevated. Learning stress management techniques is not to be seen as a solution to the issues arising from nuclear radiation exposure: rather, it offers a way of reducing the risk of ill health that accompanies chronic stress, until a solution is found.
2. Compared to the Control participants, it is clear that quality of life is compromised for at least some of the nuclear test veterans. Developing strategies for addressing these health inequalities is a matter of some urgency.

Both the Minister and DVA have been advised of the New Zealand Nuclear Test Veterans Study, but have selected to ignore its existence. Mr Ric Johnstone has approached an eminant Australian scientist and asked him to comment on the Pilot Project (Psychological Impact). He agrees with the methodology and the findings and stated that the findings might be expected to apply equally to Australian Nuclear Veterans.

Restricting the Study to cancer and mortality statistics from this complexity of medical outcomes is not only superficial but continues the lack of a duty of care practiced by the Government in its treatment of nuclear veterans. It seems remarkable that some indication of this medical inter-relationship was not forthcoming from the range of medical expertise involved in the Study. Delaying this study for half a century is negligent in the extreme and does not reflect the speed or size of compensation afforded to a parliamentarian when he fell off his pushbike.

Not undertaking a complete and integrated health investigation of the nuclear veterans has resulted in a severely repressed medical assessment.

Health Physics

The Dosimetry Study has concentrated on the requirements of planning documents and regulations when investigating radiological safety, but has not examined the implementation changes and errors that were revealed during the Royal Commission interrogations. Any discussion of mismanagement and regulation violations were treated as low level and isolated incidents. There has been no attempt to put together a complete picture of the errors and violations that occurred in the implementation of the Health Physics plan. One of the early examples is the minimisation of the importance of the lack of health physics safety procedures, including the availability of decontamination facilities, that were not provided to the crew of HMAS Koala and the RAAF air and ground crews during Operation Hurricane. Also, it is surprising that the Study did not notice that the first re-entry to the vicinity of the Hurricane GZ was Australian and may have been by the crew of HMAS Koala, the vessel responsible for dragging the Lagoon floor and recovering parts of HMS Plym on the day of the explosion (the alternative candidate, in charge of the initial entry from HMS Tracker was Wing Cmd Thomas, also Australian). The attachment must be read to understand the full impact of non compliance with safety regulations.

Many of the AWRE Reports, currently quoted by the Study, were not so acceptable to senior AWRE staff. An internal AWRE memo written by Pearson (JT Tomblin dept) on 22 Aug 55 stated:

“There remains the question of reporting on these tests, and here we are very conscious of the delays that have occurred in publishing and distributing information from past trials, for which we have been subjected to criticism both at home and overseas. Apart from the general difficulty of getting staff to write reports after the event, much of the trouble has been that each past trial has been an urgent ad hoc affair under a planning staff pressed into service from different departments, none of them with a continuing interest.”

The memo goes on to discuss the difficulty experienced in obtaining Australian and Canadian participation in the preparation of these reports. An example of a major misleading statement, concerning the unexpected exposure of an Australian health physics surveyor (the Sgt Smith incident), can be seen in the Health Physics Report for Antler (Maj McDougall et al), where this particular task was described as being undertaken by the RAF Regiment. See attachment and Royal Commission Report for controversial detail.

Research Capabilities

See comments in the attachment on data reviewed in the Dosimetry Report for a list of critical Royal Commission documents that do not appear to have been researched by the Study. Important records that are still missing, such as Ship’s Logs and Reports of Proceedings for the month of Hurricane and Hospital records for Maralinga, Emu Fields and Amberley should have been acknowledged as areas of deficiency in the Study. Available in the Australian National Archives are some indispensable files, compiled by the Royal Commission, that appear to have been overlooked by the Study:

* The Australian Collation, consisting of 96 Volumes in chronological order. RC800 Series.
* Bundle of paginated documents collected from the Ministry of Defence, London, consisting of 11 Volumes. RC558 Series.
* Bundle of documents collected from the Foreign Commonwealth Relations Office, London, consisting of 6 Parts. RC559 Series.
* Transcript of Proceedings, consisting of 17 Volumes. A6448 Series.
* Keyword Index to Transcript. A6483 Series.

Ignoring the content of these files will prove disasterous to any study concerning nuclear veterans. A consequential outcome is that the Study may have relied on material from studies and investigations that have also not taken these very comprehensive collections into their considerations.

It must also be explained in the report that if DVA has not acessed material that is closed to the Public, then the Study cannot be effectively completed until the years 2015 – 2016.

Too much importance appears to have been placed on the completeness of ARPANSA records. These were collected in the main by Mr Turner, the Australian Health Physics Representative who was only present at Maralinga and was not privy to the majority of UK classified material. Except for certain restricted releases after the Royal Commission, ARPANSA would have gathered very little on the Monte Bello Islands or on the tests at Emu Field. I have records showing that much of the material collected by Mr Turner and Mr Moroney (CXRL employee involved during and after Antler) was destroyed or handed to other Departments where it is no longer accessible.

Where Have all the Dosage Records Gone?

Dosage records for participants that were not collected, were surmised, were removed from the records or have been lost, include groups that were represented in all tests and who operated in areas of higher contamination risk e.g.:

* RAAF Lincoln air and ground crews collecting cloud samples during Hurricane and Totem 1. No safety precautions and no records initiated.
* HMAS Koala crew, who dragged the bottom of the Lagoon for parts of HMS Plym immediately after the Hurricane detonation and later recovered and disposed of a sunken and contaminated landing craft. Most of the crew changed with the crew of HMAS Karangi and were involved in the later recovery of contaminated marking and mooring buoys after Hurricane. No safety precautions and no records.
* HMAS Hawkesbury crew present during and 3 1/2 months after Hurricane, where a universal dose for the crew stated a highly suspicious “below 20 millirem”.
* Various ships crews and others carrying out surveys and recovery tasks at the Monte Bello Islands during the Hurricane/Mosaic inter-trial period, as well as the post Mosaic period. Health Physics safety procedures were only available at a primitive level, if at all, and no records kept.
* The 13 Australian VIPs that inspected the target response equipments five days after Totem 1 included the Scientific Advisor to the Military Board and his Staff Officer. They stated in their after action report that all individual dosimeters exceeded full scale readings and it was estimated that the party received one roentgen by driving around the centre of the contaminated area (contamination from equipment inspection not estimated). UK BDRSS advised a controversial statement of exposures that ranged from 0.05 – 0.13 R for gamma, and when aggregated with beta 0.16 – 0.24 R. DVA has omitted these people from the Nominal Roll and therefore from cancer and mortality considerations.
* Indoctrinee Force at Buffalo was almost all shown with a dose of “below 400 millirem” that does not fit the variety of circumstances of their indoctrination and assistance to the Target Response Group.
* Engineer Group at Buffalo. Almost entirely employed in the Forward Area with no dosages recorded.
* Various groups employed during the Buffalo/Antler inter-trial period (see attachment for some of the functions carried out in the Yellow area). Film badges were processed by CXRL, but are no longer available. A dosage list for the month of May 1957 has been recovered from other sources.
* Engineer Group at Antler. Almost entirely employed in the Forward Area with few (about 5) dosages recorded. Film badge issue and recording sheets have been found for one day, about 2 weeks prior to Antler for a Blue Area showing some otherwise unrecorded dosages. Blue was the lowest level of contamination, no special protective clothing required, it was unmarked and was not otherwise defined except as being the Forward Area, where they were accomodated.

Not included in the above list. On 1 August 1957, the Australian Health Physics Representative reported to the Atomic Weapons Test Safety Committee (AWTSC) “that only a proportion of the film badges had been processed during the Buffalo operation”. This lack of efficiency on the part of the Buffalo Health Physics management organisation did not appear to draw a rebuke from the AWTSC or any follow-up action for Antler. Many of these groups have theoretical dosage assessments that do not make sense when compared with the practical readings of the inter-trial JSTU unit that was employed between Hurricane and Mosaic.

These situations have had adverse effects on compensation claimants when they have been asked to provide evidence of exposure, an essential prerequisite to a successful claim.

References to Watch

A general comment on the inappropriateness of using comparative health incidence statistics experienced by workers employed by other industry or government installations. These people worked on routine tasks where their dose could be predicted and fully controlled. They were normally protected from inhalation hazards, did not operate under primitive field conditions and were controlled at the working level by Health Physics Technicians who had more than a few weeks training. By today’s standards, much of the implementation of radiological safety requirements during the UK tests would have been criminally negligent.

Conclusion

Epidemiology routinely looks for large scale studies of many people using known contaminants over a long period. The only factor readily available in this study is a long period and this is marred by an initial gap of 30 years from Operation Hurricane before any attempt was made by the government to gather general health statistics that could be relevant to the current Study. The Study has attempted to confine its examination of the proliferation of the many hundreds of radioactive and chemical contaminants resulting in a large variety of deleterious health effects, within an overly restrictive cancer field. Instead of taking a less conservative approach, the Study has operated within a strictly compartmentalized environment, avoiding any attempt to identify the inter-relationship between the multitude of causative agents and the many potential adverse health outcomes.

The methodology used in the Study’s construction and implementation has been enshrouded in secrecy, even the sub-groups involved not being allowed a full and frank interchange of information. Assistance has never been requested from the Consultative Forum, where the circulation of earlier draft reports may have avoided last minute and less than comprehensive comments from the Consultative Forum. This is a ridiculous situation, particularly when the medical-in-confidence information used in the study is confined to a participants health condition, and this is normally contained in the various government registries where it is only released as depersonalised statistics. Some of this health information however, may already be in the public forum, apparently preventing access to co-located data of potential importance to the Study. This circumstance could have been easily fixed by a properly constructed research plan that filtered out health data concerning a particular participant before it was formally presented to the interested area(s). Because of the importance of research to all areas of the Study, this function should have been managed by DVA, where advantage could be taken of its use in other areas, such as the construction of a knowledge base for use by Delegates handling nuclear veteran compensation claims.

Much of the material concerning participant’s health before 1985 is available publicly in the final submission of Counsel Assisting the Royal Commission (Archives RC861). This document should have been of importance to the Study and should not have been excluded from the study because it contained personal information.

Disregarding the biological attraction of certain organs and tissues for particular radionuclides, has resulted in the dose for such a nuclide being diluted as a whole body dose, rather than considering its very much more concentrated effect within its host organ or tissue. It follows that omitting this step will then overlook the unique set of risk factors that can result in a series of particular health outcomes. This significant break in the investigative chain, resulting in the use of external possibly unrelated data, has left the study with no means of firmly basing its health assessments on information that should have been made available from within the Study, placing the overall validity of the Study in question.

This breakdown in Study continuity should have been obvious to the DVA managers and their health specialist, who were represented at most of the committee and sub-committee meetings.

A well designed Pilot Study would have demonstrated these failures and allowed a correct mix of expertise to be assembled. Other areas of improvement that should have been discovered, include a need for overall control of research, as well as improved management and intercommunication facilities between different Study areas. The re-use of data from the discredited Donovan Study, if originally checked in detail, would have avoided the series of adhoc running repairs that still do not appear to have been completed. The lack of a well designed quality assurance check of this data has introduced both selection and information bias.

It is considered that the research, planning and management of this extremely complicated and medically interwoven Epidemiological Study is beyond the current technical competence of DVA. Confidence in the conduct of this Study, that has stumbled from pillar to post during the last five years, must be estimated as well below 50%.

Regards
Alan Batchelor

Betrayal of Nuclear Veterans (SNAFU) from Dennis Hayden

June 29, 2011

Dear All ,

Passed for information . Another mass circulation email follow up to Members of Parliament and media goes out week commencing 4th July under the same title ” It is time for the Government to get off the fence ” .

Regards to all ,

Dennis Hayden .
—– Original Message —–
From: Dennis Hayden
To: MIKE HENNESSY ; ALEX SALMOND MP ; ALEX CUNNINGHAM MP ; DR ANDREW MURRISON ; DR LIAM FOX MINISTER ; Nic Dakin MP ; altendorffh@parliament.uk ; brazierj@parliament.uk ; COFFEY, Luke
Cc: SUSIE BONIFACE ; JOE WATTS
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 1:21 PM
Subject: Fw: IT IS TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO GET OFF THE FENCE

JUSTICE FOR NUCLEAR VETERANS CAMPAIGN

– SUNDAY MIRROR AND THE NUCLEAR TEST SHAME WEBSITE .

FROM THE COMBINED VETERANS FORUM INTERNATIONAL ( CVFI )

Dear Members of Parliament ,

IT IS TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO GET OFF OF THE FENCE

We forward the following for your attention :

1) a REDACTED COPY of recent email sent to Former Shadow Minister for Veterans , now Cabinet Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister , Mark Harper MP entitled ” The Ministry of Defence and the Outrageous Betrayal of Loyal Servicemen .”

2) an email for all Members of Parliament with comment on the recent Queen’s Birthday Hounour to Professor Al Rowland , Massey University, New Zealand for his cytogenetic study showing significant elevated chromosomal ( DNA damage ) in blood tested nuclear veterans .

And :

3) A cartoon attachment entitled ” The Truth ” .

The political exclusion of nuclear test veterans and widows from justice is a breach of the military covenant which forces loyal servicemen with no other option than taking legal action against the Ministry of Defence .

Yours sincerely

The Combined Veterans’ Forum International – Action Executive :
Shirley Denson – Dennis Hayden – Ken McGinley ( UK ) – Roy Sefton QSM ( NZ )

—–

From: THE CVFI [mailto:dennishayden44@tiscali.co.uk]
Sent: 23 June 2011 10:41
To: HARPER, Mark
Cc: LibdemleaderDEPUTY PRIME MINISTER ; ROBIN GRAINGER( ATOMIC vETERANS LITIGATION GROUP )
Subject: IT IS TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO GET OFF THE FENCE

To ; MARK HARPER MP FOR THE FOREST OF DEAN REDACTED COPY

FORMER SHADOW MINISTER FOR VETERANS

CABINET SECRETARY TO THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Copy ; Deputy Prime Minister , Nigel Clegg , MP

Robin Grainger , Atomic Veterans Litigation Group

Dear Mr Harper ,

The Ministry of Defence and the Outrageous Betrayal of Loyal Servicemen

It is sometime since I last contacted you concerning the surviving nuclear test veterans and widows . In your experience as a Shadow Minister for Veterans you have been briefed by lies and misinformation by officials at the Ministry of Defence . Yet this has been outweighed by the mass of archive and other fact you have been sent by myself , your constituent , over the years as member of the CVFI .

The following email and attachment ( an amended version , first circulated and copied to you in 2008 , when the Rowland Study , showing significant elevated genetic damage, in nuclear veterans was initially peer reviewed ) is forwarded again for your attention . This is also being distributed to Members of Parliament and to the Press .

The nuclear test veterans and widows have repeatedly said , we are being undemocratically and politically excluded from justice and have been since having the misfortune to have been sent as experimental human guinea pigs to witness the nuclear weapons tests during the 1950’s and 60’s .

The fact of the matter is, as mentioned to you many months ago , we served notice that the longer the Ministry of Defence continues to uphold its policy to attempt to deny the nuclear veterans and widows justice then, through FOI questions and other reports , more damning evidence of the MoD’s atrocious behaviour and activities would enter the public domain .

This in fact is what has happened. As a result of the MoD’s intransigence and legal delaying tactics the Redfern Inquiry Report of November 2010 has revealed the fact that nuclear test veterans have been part of an ongoing , for over four decades ,medical research programme which has involved the illegal removal of human tissue , organs and bone in covert , without consent , collusion with several government departs .( Michael Redfern QC’s report pages 89 and 90 etc ).

This has NOT been done to give the veterans the medical monitoring they deserved whilst living , to afford them early remedial health treatments whilst alive , but for reasons of political cost saving , denial and cover -up.

The redfern Report states removed body parts are examined and then destroyed in order to avoid compensation payments . One would imagine we are discussing the activities of a third world dictatorship , or the worst excesses of World War Two NAZ I German Concentration Camps or the Imperial Japanese Army rather than the activitIes of a Ministry of Defence in a democracy .

To add to this horror, this ‘ medical research ‘ progarmme is still being continued , under title MR185 , and nuclear test veterans are still today being ‘flagged ‘ for covert , illegal , without consent post mortems as has been done to nuclear industry workers .

Ironically , the Redfern Report places the Health Protection Agency ( HPA ) [ – the former NRPB – who during the 1980’s and 90’s manipulated , without blood testing , epidemiological statistical studies to deny nuclear test veterans were contaminated by ingested and inhaled fall – out . ] and the Ministry of Defence is at the heart of controlling and directing this research programme, to desecrate the bodies of loyal servicemen and place them into coffins with broom sticks in place of removed leg femurs, in order to deceive grieving relatives . At least , the Germans and the Japanese experimented on their enemies and captives whilst our democracy has and continues to experiment on its own loyal servicemen .

The Redfern Report exposes this long ongoing research programme has been carried out with the active collusion of the NHS , Atomic Weapons Establlishment , Medical Research Council doctors and scientists assisted by assorted pathologists , doctors and coroners over the years .

Nuclear test veterans were made to stand and face atomic weapons in a process called ” indoctrination ” and then live and work in radioactive fall out areas , unlike civilian AWE scientists the servicemen were exposed to radiation without any protective clothing .

This was and remains a breach of trust , .some could say even one of deliberate , criminal negligence .

The Ministry of Defence , understandably given the truth of the nuclear weapons test experimental programme , is pouring a bottomless pit of tax- payers money to keep the Atomic Veterans Litigation Group out of court , whilst in a recent 8 year period it is reported they have paid staff £330.3 million in bonus payments and several millions in fighting the case against them by the Atomic Veterans Litigation Group .

It appears no expense of tax -payers money is being spared in order to prevent the MoD’s atrocious activities being cross examined in open court .

You may have had copy of papers distributed to politicians and the media by an associate to the CVFI , Mr David Whyte , who served at Christmas Island entitled ” The Inveterate Liars of the Ministry of Defence ” and ” Man’s Inhumanity to Man ” . These mass circulated papers go some way to describe the anger about the unethical activities of the Ministry of Defence in direct breach of any meaningful military covenant . But that anger is felt not just for officials within the MoD , the anger also applies equally to all politicians who have supported the misinfomation and lies of this department over the years .

Truth and trust are the precious pillars of democracy . The Ministry of Defence has deliberately broken both .Now they are intent to water down the promise made by the Prime Minister to enshrine the military covenant into law because of the fear of increased legal action against them . The legal action against them is precisely because they have broken and ignored the military covenant over the years and are committed to continue to do so .

Thankfully , we have the detemined legal support of Rosenblatt , solicitors of London , who are currently and sucessfully seeking justice for the Atomic Veterans Litigation Group in the High Court . The next phase of this takes place with Tribunal Appeal Ccourt hearings from mid July and a Supreme Court hearing at the end of July .

Whatever the outcome of these hearings the determination of veterans and widows to seek justice will continue ,..The atrocities , lies and bad faith of the MoD impel us to do so .

It is in the context of the above , and continued emerging evidence, that our email to Members of Parliament and the Press urges the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister to get off the fence and mediate a just and honourable settlement of our claims .

Yours sincerley ,

Dennis Hayden

31 Beauchamp Meadow

Lydney

GL15 5NS

01594 845118

on behalf of the Action Executive

The Combined Veterans’ Forum International

Shirley Denson – Dennis Hayden – Ken McGinley ( UK ) – Roy Sefton ( NZ )

Legal Advisor to the CVFI :

Ian Anderson, International Advocate and Attorney at Law ( New York )

This is an open email letter , it is free for international distribution by any recipient .

end quote. Dont believe nuclear salesmen such as Ziggy.

To prove the supposed safety of radiation exposure, nuclear veterans have to be shown to be hale and healthy. They are not in reality, and neither are many of their children. The denial of justice in the courts by cooked books and missing evidence enables the authorities to state that the guinea pigs are fine, so let’s build reactors, mine the uranium, vent fission product from reactors and pretend we can predict and control mother nature for the aeons it takes for the reactor waste to decay.

We live on the earth, not the sun. Szilard patented the chain reaction process precisely to protect his method of making hundreds of new radio nuclides in an improved method over that of Lawrence and others.

That was the purpose and every reactor uses that 1934 patent contents. Reactors make radioactive poisons by the ton. Many of them vent to the biosphere during normal operation and anyone who disagrees is, according to South Australian Ministers of the Crown, such as Kevin Foley, are “Feral”.

ie are considered by him to be useless introductions to the populations and of no benefit to society. He has moral dyslexia. He’s the feral. He should stay at the pub with his mates. Which is not to say he does not have the right to hit the town at night in safety. Which sadly, on two occassions, didnt happen. The details of what sparked one of the attacks on him is before the courts. An interesting side show in the nuclear debate relating to the man who calls anti nukers “feral”. See your dictionary and check the rabbit bounty.

South Australia is being turned into the world’s biggest open cut uranium mine, and the state economy is increasingly being built upon defence contracts with the US as the West prepares for WW3. That is my opinion.

In such a war, the more nuke reactors there are, the more massive radiological weapons will be on the ground waiting for an enemy strike. Let alone the waste dumps, the fuel rod pools etc.

An enemy nation with non nuclear missiles could execute a nuclear attack so long as the target was a nuclear reactor.

Still, officially, all A-OK. The nuclear veterans officially are hail and hearty.

Pigs fly.

Betrayal of Nuclear Veterans – from Dennis Hayden

June 29, 2011

“Dennis Hayden” <dennishayden44@tiscali.co.uk

Dear Friends ,

Nuclear Veterans Campaign for Justice

Passed for further information .

The following letter to my constituency MP , Mark Harper , former Shadow Minister for Veterans, now Cabinet Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister , is sent for information .

It gives an explanation , in the contest of the Redfern Report published in November 2010 and the recent honour to Professor Rrowland for his services genetic science , for the reasons why it is time for the Governments of UK and Australia to get off the fence ..

Regards as always ,

Dennis

Please feel free to pass copy to anyone .but to your own constituency MP and local papers in particular . This is part of the campaign for publicity before the mid – July Apppeal Tribunal Hearings and Supreme Court Hearing at end July .

—– Original Message —–
From: Dennis Hayden
To: MARK HARPER MP
Cc: DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER ; ROBIN GRAINGER ; editor@theforester.co.uk ; EDITOR FOREST & WYE VALLEY REVIEW ; ROYALL, Baroness
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 10:40 AM
Subject: Fw: IT IS TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO GET OFF THE FENCE

To ; MARK HARPER MP FOR THE FOREST OF DEAN
FORMER SHADOW MINISTER FOR VETERANS
CABINET SECRETARY TO THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Copy ; Deputy Prime Minister , Nigel Clegg , MP From Dennis Hayden
Robin Grainger , Atomic Veterans Litigation Group Combined Veterans’ Forum International
Editors of both Forest of Dean Newspapers
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon ( for information)

Dear Mr Harper ,

The Ministry of Defence and the Outrageous Betrayal of Loyal Servicemen

It is sometime since I last contacted you concerning the surviving nuclear test veterans and widows . In your experience as a Shadow Minister for Veterans you have been briefed by lies and misinformation by officials at the Ministry of Defence . Yet this has been outweighed by the mass of archive and other fact you have been sent by myself , your constituent , over the years as member of the CVFI . Therefore , on the subject of the nuclear test veterans , it is safe to say you have a better than average knowledge of the MoD’s outrageous betrayal of loyal servicemen .

The following email and attachment ( an amended version , first circulated and copied to you in 2008 , when the Rowland Study , showing significant elevated genetic damage, in nuclear veterans was initially peer reviewed ) is forwarded again for your attention . This is also being distributed to Members of Parliament , to the Press and for nuclear test veterans to send copy to their own local newspapers .

This is copied to the Deputy Prime Minister on the slim chance, in the course of your working day as his Cabinet Parliamentary Secretary , you may pass copy to him for his attention as requested in the past . Although I suspect , from Mr Cleggs lack of any response and the” back-flipping ” of the convictions of support for the nuclear test veterans by Nick Harvey MP , the Coalitions’ Lib Dem Armed Forces Minister, this is probably unlikely to happen .

The nuclear test veterans and widows have repeatedly said , we are being undemocratically and politically excluded from justice and have been since having the misfortune to have been sent as experimental human guinea pigs to witness the nuclear weapons tests during the 1950’s and 60’s .

The fact of the matter is, as mentioned to you many months ago , we served notice that the longer the Ministry of Defence continues to uphold its policy to attempt to deny the nuclear veterans and widows justice then, through FOI questions and other reports , more damning evidence of the MoD’s atrocious behaviour and activities would enter the public domain .

This in fact is what has happened. As a result of the MoD’s intransigence and legal delaying tactics the Redfern Inquiry Report of November 2010 has revealed the fact that nuclear test veterans have been part of an ongoing , for over four decades ,medical research programme which has involved the illegal removal of human tissue , organs and bone in covert , without consent , collusion with several government departs .( Michael Redfern QC’s report pages 89 and 90 etc ).

This has not been done to give the veterans the medical monitoring they deserved whilst living , to afford them early remedial health treatments whilst alive , but for reasons of political cost saving , denial and cover -up.

The Redfern Report states removed body parts are examined and then destroyed in order to avoid compensation payments . One would imagine we are discussing the activities of a third world dictatorship , the worst excesses of World War 2I German Concentration Camps or the Imperial Japanese Army rather than the activitIes of a Ministry of Defence in a democracy .

To add to this horror, this ‘ medical research ‘ progarmme is still being continued , under title MR185 , and nuclear test veterans are still today being ‘flagged ‘ for covert , illegal , without consent post mortems as has been done to nuclear industry workers .

Ironically , the Redfern Report places the Health Protection Agency ( HPA ) [ – the former NRPB – who during the 1980’s and 90’s manipulated , without blood testing , epidemiological statistical studies to deny nuclear test veterans were contaminated by ingested and inhaled fall – out . ] and the Ministry of Defence at the heart of controlling and directing this research programme to desecrate the bodies of loyal servicemen and place them into coffins with broom sticks in place of removed leg femurs in order to deceive grieving relatives . At least , the Germans and the Japanese experimented on their enemies and captives whilst our democracy is experimenting on its own loyal servicemen .

The Redfern Report exposes this long ongoing research programme has been carried out with the active collusion of the NHS , Atomic Weapons Establlishment , Medical Research Council doctors and scientists assisted by assorted pathologists , doctors and coroners over the years .

Nuclear test veterans were made to stand and face atomic weapons in a process called ” indoctrination ” and then live and work in radioactive fall out areas , unlike civilian AWE scientists the servicemen were exposed to radiation without any protective clothing . This was and remains a breach of trust .some could say even one of deliberate criminal negligence .

The Ministry of Defence , understandably given the truth of the nuclear weapons test experimental programme , is pouring a bottomless pit of tax- payers money to keep the Atomic Veterans Litigation Group out of court , whilst in a recent 8 year period it is reported they have paid staff £330.3 million in bonus payments and several millions in fighting the case against them by the Atomic Veterans Litigation Group .

It appears no expense of tax -payers money is being spared in order to prevent the MoD’s atrocious activities being cross examined in open court .

You may have had copy of papers distributed to politicians and the media by an associate to the CVFI , Mr David Whyte , who served at Christmas Island entitled ” The Inveterate Liars of the Ministry of Defence ” and ” Man’s Inhumanity to Man ” . These mass circulated papers go some way to describe the anger about the unethical activities of the Ministry of Defence in direct breach of any meaningful military covenant . But that anger is felt not just for officials within the MoD , the anger also applies equally to all politicians who have supported the misinfomation and lies of this department over the years .

Truth and trust are the precious pillars of democracy . The Ministry of Defence has deliberately broken both .Now they are intent to water down the promise made by the Prime Minister to enshrine the military covenant into law because of the fear of increased legal action against them . The legal action against them is precisely because they have broken and ignored the military covenant over the years and are committed to continue to do so .

Thankfully , we have the detemined legal support of Rosenblatt , solicitors of London , who are currently and sucessfully seeking justice for the Atomic Veterans Litigation Group in the High Court . The next phase of this takes place with Tribunal Appeal Ccourt hearings from mid July and a Supreme Court hearing at the end of July .

Whatever the outcome of these hearings the determination of veterans and widows to seek justice will continue ,..The atrocities , lies and bad faith of the MoD impel us to do so .

It is in the context of the above , and continued emerging evidence, that our email to Members of Parliament and the Press urges the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister to get off the fence and mediate a just and honourable settlement of our claims .

Yours sincerley ,

Dennis Hayden
31 Beauchamp Meadow
Lydney
GL15 5NS
on behalf of the Action Executive
The Combined Veterans’ Forum International
Shirley Denson – Dennis Hayden – Ken McGinley ( UK ) – Roy Sefton ( NZ )
Legal Advisor to the CVFI :
Ian Anderson, International Advocate and Attorney at Law ( New York )

This is an open email letter , it is free for international distribution by any recipient .

end quote

Think twice before believing nuclear authorities.

US bends rules to keep nuke plants compliant with law.

June 29, 2011

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/166249/20110620/nuclear-regulators-nuclear-regulation-nuclear-power-u-s-nuclear-power-plants-ap-nuclear.htm

June 20, 2011 3:30 PM EDT

The federal agency responsible for overseeing the nuclear power industry has continually rewritten rules to allow aging plants to continue running even as they fall into disrepair, an investigation by the Associated Press found.

No new nuclear reactors have been built in the U.S. since the 1970’s, placing the burden for generating nuclear energy on a network of aging facilities. According to the AP report, the nuclear industry enjoys a close relationship with regulators, who frequently adapt rules to retroactively cover up violations by determing that the existing rules are “overly conservative.”

The process of manipulating data in order to make plants compliant, known as “sharpening the pencil” or “pencil engineering,” has become prevalent. As a result, safety lapses that include cracked nozzles, malfunctioning cooling components and leaky valves have proliferated as plants deteriorate over time.

“It’s a philosophical position that [federal regulators] take that’s driven by the industry and by the economics: What do we need to do to let those plants continue to operate?” said Paul Blanch, an engineer who worked in the nuclear industry.

“They somehow sharpen their pencil to either modify their interpretation of the regulations, or they modify their assumptions in the risk assessment.”

President Obama was an early supporter of expanding nuclear energy by building new plants in the U.S.
Close
Nuclear Regulators Bend Regulations to Keep Old Plants Compliant
(Photo: REUTERS/Sergei Karpukhin)
Tennessee will face serious nuclear threat once the 1000 ton radioactive waste arrives for incineration

Original Washington Post article here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/federal-nuclear-regulators-repeatedly-weaken-or-fail-to-enforce-safety-standards/2011/06/19/AGzqHYbH_story.html

Of course, the new plants which will be built in Australia, (lets face it folks, its merely a waiting game until us die hards die out) will be promoted like the Anzacs. Time will not weary them, they shall not grow old”. Or so we will be told.

Factor in the cost of decommissioning and the cost of waste storage and cost of old mine security and remediation and its not clean and green and carbon neutral. Then remember that Toshiba estimate a “Fukushima every 30 years”. (see previous post.)

I see Ziggy has been wheeled out again in Aus, to sell nuclear tobacco.

Washington Post:
“Commercial nuclear reactors in the United States were designed and licensed for 40 years. When the first ones were being built in the 1960s and 1970s, it was expected that they would be replaced with improved models long before those licenses expired.

But that never happened. The 1979 accident at Three Mile Island, massive cost overruns, crushing debt and high interest rates ended new construction proposals for several decades.”

Still Ziggy gets his commission.

The poor implementation of domestic solar electrical generation

June 26, 2011

The inequity inherent in the South Australian domestic photo-voltaic power generation scheme for house holders has always been apparent.

Power generated by home roof mounted PV panels is in the first instance consumed by appliances in use or in stand by mode in the home. Power not consumed in that manner is exported to the public power grid. Power companies pay above market rate for such power. The amount credited to home owners by the power companies is set by the government. It is about double the rate power companies charge consumers per kilowatt.

The government subsidies paid to home owners for the purchase of the roof mounted
PV generation system is insufficient to enable many house holds to afford to purchase even a cheap low kilowatt PV generating system.

As a result of the feed in credit paid to owners of home PV electricity systems,
Power companies are raising the price of electricity. Thus there are winners and losers in this scheme. The winners are those who could afford to buy the PV generation systems, and the losers are those who could not. The people who will be affected by the rise in price of electricity in South Australia are the poor who could not buy the PV system and others who chose not to. Despite the government rebate at purchase, there is still an out of pocket (bank) cost ranging from $2,500 to $10,000 or more depending in the size of the system bought.

Prior to purchase, my brother and I discussed the social inequity of the schemes in our respective states (he being in Victoria) and we acknowledged that we were in the fortunate position of being able to buy reasonably sized PV systems.

So why should we end up paying more for electricity to cover the cost of the government feed in credit paid to PV generator owners? Better to benefit than to suffer increased cost.

Having owned a PV generator system for a couple of months now – and it is winter – judging on the amount of kilowatts so far exported from our roof panels to the public grid, well over $200 will be deducted from our next power bill. Both as a result of lower use of grid power and also because of the export credit paid to us.

Lower income families, people living in rented properties, etc, will however be paying more per kilowatt in part to cover the cost to the power companies of the credits paid to domestic PV generator owners.

I see this is as fundamentally fair and retrograde. I do not believe there is any reason to enforce a credit system which forces power companies to pay me more per kilowatt for the electricity I sell to them than the price they sell the electricity to me.

As it is, the generosity of the system – not withstanding that it will take 10 years to recoup my capital outlay for the system ( and which for us that capital expenditure merely represents a reduction in bank interest and consequently a lower tax bill) – has resulted in double the amount of people taking up the government subsidy and rebate and purchasing domestic PV generating systems.

The cost of these subsidies has blown out and has an impact on the state’s finances.

In the near future the purchase rebate scheme will become less generous, however the amount of the export credit will remain at about double the market per kilowatt.

If one’s aim was to maintain social equity and reduce carbon emissions, the system is dismal failure. If one puts the welfare of the most vulnerable after the perceived need to reduce carbon emissions, then one can say that in effect, in real effect, the first people who have paid a form of carbon tax, are the poor who do not own domestic PV power generating systems.

As an answer to carbon emissions, the scheme is marginal in its impact. A great number of marketing companies have sprung up to sell domestic solar power generating systems, and these companies use other companies to install the systems.
Again, government intervention in the market has produced a great variation in the quality of companies involved in the industry, and the consumer has little knowledge of the history or expertise of these companies.

In most instances, the companies making the sale are not the company who will do the actual installation and the consumer with a complaint has two companies to contend with, with all that entails.

Our system is working well, generating half capacity even on cloudy winter days.

My lifestyle is such is that I am retired. My modifications to maximise the benefit of the PV electricity grid feed in is to mainly live during the day in one of the smaller rooms, using a laptop computer as a TV and internet device, recharging the batteries as night. The main large TV will only be used at night, and I am converting the hi fi system to battery power, again, recharged at night. Living in a small room for the most of the day, a small air conditioner of low power will be used in summer.

None of these steps benefit the typical low income person, who makes do will as few appliances and comforts as possible. However, potential may exist for small portable solar battery chargers and 12 volt battery/electric appliances such as TVs and fridges to migrate from caravanning and camping market to the domestic arena. Caravanning and four wheel drive magazines are full of adverts for battery electric appliances and portable solar recharging units. No doubt some bright spark will come up with
Auto recharge circuits and so on so solar/battery operation will be automatic will no action or knowledge required by people living in meagre circumstances.

The idea of a government subsidy to enable low income families to change to such appliances is beyond its powers of imagination.

Lastly, it must be pointed out that thousands of small solar generation systems now being installed on the roofs of homes around Australia ( accompanied by all of the social inequity explained above), is a very inefficient way of producing PV generated electricity.

The most efficient means of producing anything, including electricity, by any means, is via industrial scale mass production. So the cost to the state, the nation and the people of the individual dwelling small scale PV solar electrical generation rebate and subsidy and credit scheme is actually delaying the construction of industrial scale PV and solar thermal electrical power generation systems ALL Australians can benefit from. In this land which clearly could, according to an Australian society of engineers, power itself completely by a mix of the various solar generation systems now available, and which, at the industrial scale would incorporate heat bank reserves for night time generation and periods of above expected peak demand.

So, yea, I’m better off with a roof mounted solar generator, but Australia is not.

While I’m at it, there is a need for a bright spark to come up with a solar laptop battery charger which accepts most types of laptop battery so that several batteries can be charged at once without the need for multiple laptops. As it is I’m in the market for a partially dead macbook which retains the ability to charge a battery. It would of course be plugged into a solar charged car battery to run the half dead Mac’s charging circuit.

We are at a rudimentary stage in our conversion from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are a major health hazard and that fact takes nothing away from the premise of this blog – anti nuclear.

Finally, the Manhattan Project did not locate uranium enrichment gadgets in every house in America. That massive undertaking took place at the industrial scale at purpose built sites.

The thousands of domestic roofs now fitted with PV generators are a poor substitute for industrial scale solar power generation. Better than nothing, but the implementation of the scheme has resulted in the poor becoming excluded and worse off. This should not have been permitted.

On the subject of laptop batteries, the current trend of building in batteries into the structure of the laptop so that they cannot be removed by the consumer is counter productive. The alternative in such a situation is to power the laptop via an inverter which converts the 12 volt from a solar charged battery to the 240 volt required by the laptop’s power adapter, which then, ironically and inefficiently has to step the power down to the voltage required by the laptop. Built in, non removable (by the consumer) laptop batteries are a bad idea within the concept of solar recharging of multiple batteries to minimise mains power during the night or at times of high use.

The components of the domestic PV electrical system are largely imported. Our inverter came only with a user manual in German and English is not available.
This is unacceptable for products sold in Australia. SMA should correct this as soon as possible. There will be emergency situations where home owners will need know for sure how to turn the PV generating system off. The cursory explanation given to me by the installing electrician (“I’ve never installed one of these before, but they are supposed to be the best” he said.) left me feeling more than dissatisfied.

Australian Government should get off the Fence

June 22, 2011

email from Dennis Hayden

Fw: IT IS TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO GET OFF THE FENCE

Wednesday, 22 June, 2011 10:07 PM
From:
“Dennis Hayden”
Add sender to Contacts
To:
“ALAN BATCHELOR”
Cc:
“Jim Marlow” , “LEWIS RICE” , “RIC JOHNSTONE” , “ANN MUNSLOW-DAVIES” , “PAUL LANGLEY” , “Nic Maclellan” , “PROFESSOR PETER JOHNSTON” , “SEFTON ROY” , JUDY@theblakeys.com… more

To Alan Batchelor , Vice President of the Australian Nuclear Veterans Association

Dear Alan ,

The following email and attached revised and amended cartoon ( originally sent out by the CVFI in 2008 when the Rowland study was peer reviewd ) has been sent to UK Members of Parliament , to the Press and others with an interest in the fight for the truth of the science , for justice and recognition for nuclear test veterans and widows .

Please circulate it as widely as possible as it will assist us all before the UK Appeal Tribunal hearings commencing mid-July and the Supreme Court Hearing at the end of July ..

This is a slightly amended version for Australian MP’s and for Australian veterans . We hope it may be helpful to the legal actions being undertaken both in Australia and the UK .

There is a great deal to feel optimistic about but we need to keep up the pressure on supportive Members of Parliament and on the Press in both the UK and Australia to our mutual benefit ,

Copy of this is sent to Prof Peter Johston of ARPANSA . This is a department who recently attempted to undermine the Rowland Study . .

Perhaps you could forward the forwarded to Australian MP’s and others with an interest in this subject .

With thanks and best regards to all ,

Dennis Hayden
for the CVFI

Dear Members of Parliament ,

IT IS TIME FOR THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT TO
GET OFF THE FENCE .

Please see the attachment to this email entitled : ” The Truth ” .

In the Queen’s recently published Birthday Honours , the 2008 , peer reviewed , cytogenetic study showing significant genetic damage in nuclear test veterans has been recognised . The high award of the UK’s equivalent to the OBE to Professor Rowland of Massey University , New Zealand , is for services to genetic science .

The clear message to all scientific advisors to the Australian government ( particularly the Australian Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency ( ARPANSA ) – former AWTSC – and the 2006 Adelaide University Mortality and Cancer authors ) , who have assisted the UK and Australian Governments to duplicitously and unethically avoid responsibility and accountability , without cytogenetic blood testing , under any meaningful military covenant for over four decades , is as follows :

IT IS CLEARLY TIME FOR THE AUSTRALIAN AND UK PRIME MINISTERS TO GET OFF THE FENCE AND MEDIATE AN HONOURABLE AND JUST SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS BY ATOMIC VETERANS AND WIDOWS IN AUSTRALIA AND UK .

It is now time for an honourable ending to successive Australian Government’s long scientific and political betrayal of the nuclear test veterans and their widows.

The present Australian Government should now have the moral will and political sense to seize the opportunity to fully address overdue compensation for ill health and premature deaths .

Political leaders should now accept that it is better to offer an apology and recognise the sacrifice made by those exposed to ionising radiation in the past rather than face never ending , and extremely damaging , scientific , medical , legal and political exposure .

We thank you for your support ,

Yours sincerely ,

THE COMBINED VETERANS’ FORUM INTERNATIONAL
open email letter dated 22nd June 2011
on behalf of all who participated in the UK ‘s nuclear weapons test experimental programme from 1952 and for surviving nuclear test veterans who are still being ‘flagged’ for continued , covert , illegal , without consent , post mortem medical research under the UK’s MR 185 .

end quote.
Paul’s note: kind of reveals the Adelaide Uni hack study confirming 23% increase in mortality from cancers suffered by nuke vets which those Adelaide Uni etc Hacks ascribed to exposure to petrol in the desert, rather than the nuclear testing, for what it was. And as soon as it was published, the Liberal Party government of the day used the media to float and push for the construction of nuclear power reactors in Australia.

The promised inclusions of the attachments to the latest batch of emails I recieved will be done as soon as the muscle spasm in my shoulders goes away. Valium is nice, but not one tends to want to just snuggle up and veg out. Not my mission, but that’s the way it is.

MUTATIONS IN BACTERIA INDUCED BY RADIATIONS

June 21, 2011

quote:

source: http://symposium.cshlp.org/content/11/38.extract
MUTATIONS IN BACTERIA INDUCED BY RADIATIONS

1. M. Demerec and
2. R. Latarjet

This extract was created in the absence of an abstract.
Excerpt

Although direct genetic tests that might prove the occurrence of mutations in bacteria cannot be made, it seems reasonable to assume from the accumulated indirect evidence that in this group of microorganisms changes that are comparable to mutations in higher organisms do occur. As might be expected, such changes affect a great variety of characteristics; in fact, mutants have been found representing all types of character for which a search has been made. For illustrations of a wide variety of bacterial mutants we do not have to go beyond the papers presented at this Symposium, where we have heard discussions of mutations affecting color (Bunting), enzymatic systems (Lwoff), biochemical characteristics (Tatum), and resistance to phages, drugs, and antibiotics (Luria).

In this paper we will consider only the specific mutations in Escherichia coli that are responsible for resistance to a certain bacteriophage. It has been shown earlier that such mutations can…

other available for download at this site:
*
The Radiation Dose-Response Curve and Bacterial Mutations Science 1951 114: 436-437
o Full Text (PDF)
*
NUCLEAR SEGREGATION AND THE DELAYED APPEARANCE OF INDUCED MUTANTS IN ESCHERICHIA COLI Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 1951 16: 357-372
o Abstract
o Full Text (PDF)
*
MUTATIONS IN ESCHERICHIA COLI INDUCED BY CHEMICAL AGENTS Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 1947 12: 256-269
o Abstract
o Full Text (PDF)
end quote

From the time, some years ago, that I learned that Australian members of the British Commonwealth Occupation Force (BCOF) and other nuke vets had been asked by the Red Cross not to donate blood, and knowing the very high level of LD 50 for many bacteria, and knowing of the mutagenic nature of ionising radiation, I have pondered the impact of the nuclear fuel cycle – from mining, refining, machining, fissioning, storage, incorporation in weapons and use of weapons – upon the evolutionary changes occuring at the microscopic level in life forms.

I see no reason to disagree with Pauling that any man caused mutations would not be beneficial and have many reasons for disagreeing with Teller’s reply “Well, that’s evolution”. And as for the British git who suggested bomb fallout would improve the human genome at the cost of some unfortuneate souls, well, I hope he’s residing in an appropriate place.

Fact is, it is hard to kill bacteria and viruses with doses considered lethal to humans, and I imagine uranium mines, refining facilities, reactors, contaminated land, and DU spoiled battlefields may well be breeding grounds of enhanced mutations of microbes.

I stand to be corrected, but this is my view. As much as the hack Andrew Bolt might scoff.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/02/why-health-authorities-are-so-worried-about-europes-mutant-e-coli-outbreak/

quote:
Why Health Authorities Are So Worried About Europe’s Mutant E. Coli Outbreak
By Bryan Walsh Thursday, June 2, 2011

Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/02/why-health-authorities-are-so-worried-about-europes-mutant-e-coli-outbreak/#ixzz1Prmorwhd

Health officials were worried enough about an unusually virulent outbreak of food-borne illness from the E. coli bacteria, which has infected more than 1,500 people in Germany and killed at least 17. But the concern jumped to another level on Thursday when the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that the responsible pathogen was a strain of E. coli that they believe had never before been seen by scientists.

According to the Beijing Genomics Institute in China, which has been working with German scientists on the outbreak, the new strain is dangerous:

Bioinformatics analysis revealed that this E. coli is a new strain of bacteria that is highly infectious and toxic.

This is a new serotype — not previously involved in any E. coli outbreaks. Comparative analysis showed that this bacterium has 93% sequence similarity with the EAEC 55989 E. coli strain, which was isolated in the Central African Republic and known to cause serious diarrhea. This new strain of E. coli, however, has also acquired specific sequences that appear to be similar to those involved in the pathogenicity of hemorrhagic colitis and hemolytic-uremic syndrome. The acquisition of these genes may have occurred through horizontal gene transfer. The analysis further showed that this deadly bacterium carries several antibiotic resistance genes, including resistance to aminoglycoside, macrolides and Beta-lactam antibiotics: all of which makes antibiotic treatment extremely difficult.

The preliminary genetic analysis indicates that the new strain is a mutant, the combination of two distinct groups of E. coli: enteroaggregative E. coli (EAEC) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC). As is often the case when germs get together and start splicing, the result is not good for people, as Liverpool University biologist Dr. Paul Wigley told the BBC Thursday:

One nasty bacteria seems to have acquired a toxin from another nasty bacteria which has resulted in an even nastier bug. It seems it is producing two toxins which cause the damage and lead to bloody diarrhea and damage to tissues including the kidneys.

Indeed, the worst cases of the outbreak have involved acute kidney failure, which is often a life-threatening complication of normal E. coli outbreaks. But usually E. coli, like most food-borne illnesses, only poses a mortal threat to very young children or those who are already weak. In the case of the current outbreak, however, women make up more than two-thirds of those affected, and young and middle-aged adults — the very patients who should be able to weather the bacteria without major risk — form a very high percentage of the worst cases. Those acute cases are also occurring with unusual frequency; while kidney complications might occur in 5% to 10% of most E. coli outbreaks, Germany has reported 470 kidney failure cases out of about 1,500 known infections.

Paul Brown Resonant Nuclear Battery ( The Alpha-Beta Voltaic Effect NuCell )

June 20, 2011

The geek in me is extremely attracted to this.
A few of these under the bonnet of an electric modded 57 Beetle would keep it going for as long as it took for it to hit a tree:

http://www.rexresearch.com/nucell/nucell.htm

Dr. Paul M. Brown (no relation to TT Brown)
(Died April 7, 2001) ~ Obituary

http://www.nuclearsolutions.com

Company Literature: Peripheral Systems
(1980s)

A radioisotope electric power system developed by inventor Paul Brown is a scientific breakthrough in nuclear power. The battery utilizes the energy given off by decaying radioactive material, converting it directly into a continuous AC electrical current. Unlike conventional nuclear generating devices, the power cell does not rely on a nuclear reaction or chemical process and does not produce radioactive waste products.

Brown’s first prototype power cell produced 100,000 times as much energy per gram of strontium-90 (the energy source) than the most powerful thermal nuclear battery yet in existence. The Nucell battery yielded 7500 watts per gram of strontium-90. Compare this to an advanced device recently developed by the US Dept. of Energy Byproducts Utilization Program. Their state-of-the-art thermal nuclear battery produced 0.063 watts per gram of strontium-90.

The key to the Nucell battery is Brown’s discovery of a method to harness the magnetic energy given off by the alpha and beta particles inherent in nuclear material. Alpha and beta particles are produced by the radioactive decay of certain naturally occurring and man-made nuclear material (radionuclides).

The electric charges of the alpha and beta particles have been captured and converted to electricity for existing nuclear batteries, but the amount of power generated from such batteries has been very small. Alpha and beta particles also possess kinetic energy by successive collisions of the particles with air molecules or other molecules. The bulk of the R&D of nuclear batteries in the past has been concerned with this heat energy which is readily observable and measurable.

The magnetic energy given off by alpha and beta particles is several orders of magnitude greater than either the kinetic energy or the direct electric energy produced by these same particles. However, the myriads of tiny magnetic fields existing at any tie cannot be individually recognized or measured. This energy is not captured locally in nature to produce heat or mechanical effects, but instead the energy escapes undetected. Brown has invented a way to “organize” these magnetic fields so the great amounts of otherwise unobservable energy could be harnessed.

The weight of the strontium-90 used to generate 75 watts of power in the Nucell prototype is approximately the same as the weight of 2 millimeters of wire cut off the end of a small paper clip. Projected sizes of the Nucell battery will range from the size of a soup can to the size of a small barrel or waste can for a 50 kilowatt model.

The alpha and beta particles utilized in the Nucell battery have a limited ability to penetrate matter; alpha particles can be contained by a piece of paper; beta particles require 0.03″ of aluminum. The Nucell battery is housed in a stainless steel, high-vacuum container, making it a safe, impermeable source of power.

Letter from Paul Brown (March 5, 1987)
(Excerpt)

In summary, alpha and beta decay are electrically charged particles expelled from the nucleus at near-light velocities. Any moving charged particle yields a magnetic field, in which energy is stored, that is carried along with it. The absorption of this charged particle causes the magnetic field to collapse and this produces an emf. The energy yielded from this field collapse is enormous and is called the alpha or beta voltaic effect.

The resonant nuclear battery is an LCR resonant tank circuit oscillating at its self-resonant frequency with energy contributed by the beta voltaic effect. The energy contributed to the tank, in excess of the circuit losses, must be removed through a high Q transformer impedance matched to the circuit. The result is a means for converting alpha and/or beta decay energy directly and efficiently into electricity, with a life expectancy determined by the half-life of the radioactive fuel used.

“Technical Explanation of the Power Cell Invention” (Excerpt)

Useful Fuels

Any radioisotope in the form of a solid that gives off alpha or beta particles can be utilized in the new power cell. The first cell constructed (that melted the wire components) employed the most powerful source known, radium-226, as the energy source. However, radium 226 gives rise through decay to the daughter product bismuth-214, which gives off strong gamma radiation that requires shielding for safety. This adds a weight penalty in mobile applications.

Radium-226 is a naturally occurring isotope which is formed very slowly by the decay of uranim-238. Radium-226 in equilibrium is present at about 1 gram per 3 million grams of uranium in the earth’s crust. Uranium mill wastes are a readily available source of radium-226 in very abundant quantities.

Uranium mill wastes contain far more energy in the radium-226 than is represented by the fission energy derived from the produced uranium.

Strontium-90 gives off no gamma radiation so it does not necessitate the use of thick lead shielding for safety. Strontium-90 does not exist in nature, but it is one of the several radioactive waste products resulting from nuclear fission. The utilizable energy from strontium-90 substantially exceeds the energy derived from the nuclear fission which gave rise to this isotope.

Once the present stores of nuclear wastes have been mined, the future supplies of strontium-90 will depend on the amount of nuclear electricity generated. Hence strontium-90 decay may ultimately become a premium fuel for such special uses as for perpetually powered wheel chairs and portable computers.

The most difficult problems in managing nuclear wastes are handling the great amount of heat generated by alpha and beta emitters and isolating the alpha and beta emmitters’ biosphere. Virtually all other alpha and beta emitters in nuclear fission wastes can be employed in the new power cells. Hence these no longer constitute wastes but have become valuable energy assets.

end quote

Linda Brown are you reading this? TT would have been very interested.

Seems much cheaper than a GE Mk1 or Mk42, whatever.

Japanese anti-nuke veteran right, Nuke “experts” wrong.

June 20, 2011

There’s a few experts who owe the unpaid truth tellers their wages:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-japan-new-attention-for-longtime-anti-nuclear-activist/2011/04/05/AFMTG3GD_story.html

By Michael Alison Chandler, Published: April 11

Tokyo — Long before the ghostly images of Fukushima’s nuclear workers in white suits and gas masks appeared in newspapers and magazines around the world, photographer Kenji Higuchi was recording the lives and risks of the industry’s front-line laborers.

The 74-year-old, with longish gray hair, published some of the first images of nuclear workers toiling inside a reactor in 1977. He documented the struggles of radiation victims and, over a half-century, wrote 19 books, including “The Truth About Nuclear Plants” and “Erased Victims.” But in this energy-hungry nation, his no-nukes message did not carry very far. “I was the least popular photographer in Japan,” he said.

end quote, partial.

Hmm, sounds like David Bradbury during his tour of Roxby Downs. Least popular film maker at BHP and Labor Party HQ.

Wonder what they are doing about the escaped “Australian Obligated” Plutoniun which escaped from the GE Mk1s at Fukushima. In 1971 they said it could never ever happen.

ive gotta organise this blog. I need to go back and collect the statements of the Australian paid experts (nuke whores) as the situation developed in the early days. Ziggy has gone quiet.

CNIC Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center Akebonobashi Co-op Japan

June 20, 2011

http://cnic.jp/english/

Be there or be square.