Plutonium: Element of Risk

<v Woman 1>[KCET theme playing] Plutonium? I don't even know what plutonium is. <v Woman 1>Really. <v Man 1>[speaking Japanese] <v Woman 2>I'm ?not very? interested in that. <v Woman 3>Not really [laughs]. <v Woman 4>No, I've not heard of ?inaudible?. <v Jack Lemmon>Do you know what plutonium is? <v Girls>[in unison] No. <v Jack Lemmon>What do you think it is? <v Girls>It's a rock [giggling]. It's a rock! <v Jack Lemmon>A rock. Well, I suppose that's as good an answer as most of us could manage. <v Jack Lemmon>Yet an adviser to President Carter recently said that plutonium and <v Jack Lemmon>what we do with it is one of the two or three great issues facing civilization. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, for the record, plutonium is a hellishly toxic, highly radioactive <v Jack Lemmon>element with two main uses. It could serve as fuel for nuclear power plants <v Jack Lemmon>or as the fission core of an atomic bomb. <v Jack Lemmon>And that dual capability has plunged the world into one of the savage debates in history. <v Jack Lemmon>There had been massive and sometimes bloody demonstrations this year already in several

<v Jack Lemmon>countries. The point of contention, either plutonium is the answer to the energy <v Jack Lemmon>crisis or is the final step towards global nuclear terror. <v Jack Lemmon>And yet, if they asked a question about plutonium on a quiz show, most of us probably <v Jack Lemmon>wouldn't even come away with a Tootsie Roll. And that's not only embarrassing, it's <v Jack Lemmon>scary. <v Jack Lemmon>And that's why we sent an investigative documentary team around the world, 40,000 miles <v Jack Lemmon>through 7 nations. In the next hour you will see and you'll hear what we uncovered. <v Jack Lemmon>May curl your hair, it may make you want to yank it out by the roots, but you'll be <v Jack Lemmon>informed and that's important. <v Jack Lemmon>The world is gonna make a decision on plutonium in the coming months, whether we get our <v Jack Lemmon>two cents in a lot. And that decision is going to go a long way towards determining our <v Jack Lemmon>future, whether we even have one. <v Jack Lemmon>[ominous music] <v Jack Lemmon>You know, I think many of us are ignorant about plutonium because we think the subject

<v Jack Lemmon>is way over our heads and you've got to be Einstein or Oppenheimer or somebody like that <v Jack Lemmon>to figure it out. But that's not true. <v Jack Lemmon>The essentials are really very simple. For instance, if I burn this stick, I'm gonna <v Jack Lemmon>get more than fire. I'll get charcoal or soot, right. <v Jack Lemmon>Well, atomic reactors, they burn uranium in bundles of long <v Jack Lemmon>skinny rods. And when that uranium is burned up, you get another product. <v Jack Lemmon>Plutonium. OK. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, of course, at this point that plutonium is nothing more than nuclear waste. <v Jack Lemmon>But if you bring those rods to a special reprocessing plant, then the <v Jack Lemmon>plutonium can be removed and now you've got a substance that's infinitely more valuable <v Jack Lemmon>than gold. And why? Because it's ready to be fabricated as fuel for <v Jack Lemmon>nuclear power plants or into the core of nuclear bombs. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, the nuclear industry is promoting big breeder reactors, which do <v Jack Lemmon>exactly what the name implies. They breed more plutonium than they use. <v Jack Lemmon>And since they can use that access to feed other breeders, then we're faced

<v Jack Lemmon>with practically a limitless supply of electrical energy. <v Jack Lemmon>And plutonium has other worthwhile uses, such as aiding in the mining of low grade ores <v Jack Lemmon>and as the long lived power for ?heart pacers?. <v Jack Lemmon>But riding sidecar with these enormous benefits are equally enormous <v Jack Lemmon>risks. You know, plutonium is named after Pluto, the Lord of Hell. <v Jack Lemmon>And that was not by accident. It's a carcinogenic second to none. <v Jack Lemmon>This much plutonium contains millions of lung <v Jack Lemmon>cancer doses. Millions. <v Jack Lemmon>You wanna talk about longevity? <v Jack Lemmon>If man had just sprinkled some plutonium into the atmosphere a quarter <v Jack Lemmon>of a million years before the Stone Age, some of it would still be lethal. <v Jack Lemmon>And of course, there's a bomb problem. 15 to 20 pounds of that terrible stuff would make <v Jack Lemmon>a bomb that's capable of practically obliterating New York City. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, all of these things must have been on the president's mind last April when he called <v Jack Lemmon>a halt to the further construction of breeder reactors and to the production and

<v Jack Lemmon>processing of plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>And because it is so poisonous and terrorists would dearly love to get their hands <v Jack Lemmon>on a bomb quantity of it, plutonium has to be guarded like it was King Kong. <v Jack Lemmon>So how well have we handled it? <v Jack Lemmon>Well, all things considered, not very well. <v Jack Lemmon>It was here on a remote tract of wasteland near Hanford, Washington, that we produced the <v Jack Lemmon>first big batch back during World War 2. <v Jack Lemmon>That plutonium formed the core of the first atomic bomb. <v Jack Lemmon>Plutonium is a manmade element. <v Jack Lemmon>If you look for it in nature, you'll find only the faintest trace in pitch blend. <v Jack Lemmon>You know, there is some parts of this plutonium story that nobody wants to remember. <v Jack Lemmon>This report from the Energy Research and Development Administration, that's called IRDA, <v Jack Lemmon>it helps shine some light into one of those dark corners. <v Jack Lemmon>It tells how from 1945 to 1947, 18 patients were

<v Jack Lemmon>injected with soluble plutonium 239 13 male, <v Jack Lemmon>five female, 15 white, three black. <v Jack Lemmon>All of them were presumed to be terminal patients, although they misdiagnosed. <v Jack Lemmon>One is having stomach cancer and one was at four year old boy. <v Jack Lemmon>He got that stuff in the veins right along with the rest of them. <v Jack Lemmon>And according to this report, only one patient ever gave permission or knew the nature <v Jack Lemmon>of the injections. <v Jack Lemmon>And it's funny, there's nothing in here about whether the doctors and scientists injected <v Jack Lemmon>themselves. <v Jack Lemmon>At every location we checked where plutonium has been handled. <v Jack Lemmon>It has been mishandled. <v Jack Lemmon>If you live in Boulder, Colorado, you live with plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>It's in the top soil, courtesy of a blunder at the Rocky Flats plant a few miles away. <v Jack Lemmon>Plutonium is processed here and back in the 60s, hundreds of barrels of plutonium <v Jack Lemmon>contaminated oil were stored outdoors. <v Jack Lemmon>The barrels rusted oil leaked out and so did plutonium, which blew into

<v Jack Lemmon>the countryside and blow. <v Jack Lemmon>It does here sometimes at 100 miles an hour. <v Jack Lemmon>The fact that plutonium had gotten beyond the fence at Rocky Flats was discovered not by <v Jack Lemmon>the government and not by the plant personnel. <v Jack Lemmon>It was detected by Dr. Edward Martel, one of the world's foremost authorities in <v Jack Lemmon>plutonium and alpha radiation producer Don Weidner. <v Jack Lemmon>I spoke to him at Boulder, where Dr. Martel works with the National Center for <v Jack Lemmon>Atmospheric Research. <v Dr. Edward Martel>The full impact of the offsite contamination, <v Dr. Edward Martel>plutonium contamination on public health is not yet <v Dr. Edward Martel>understood. I think we're in for some more surprises in this area. <v Jack Lemmon>One of the latest surprises was turned up by Dr. Carl Johnson, the head of the Jefferson <v Jack Lemmon>County Health Department with a broom and a dustpan. <v Jack Lemmon>Dr. Johnson has been taking surface dust samples and finding plutonium levels <v Jack Lemmon>several hundred times higher than samples taken by Rocky Flats. <v Jack Lemmon>He believes the windblown surface dust is hazardous.

<v Jack Lemmon>We asked him what he could do to people inhaling it. <v Dr. Carl Johnson>Well, it can cause an increased incidence and various types of cancer, <v Dr. Carl Johnson>especially cancer. The lung cancer, the bone leukemia. <v Dr. Carl Johnson>In addition, there's an increased risk of birth defects and <v Dr. Carl Johnson>there's something that there'll also be a significant increase in incidence of ill health <v Dr. Carl Johnson>due to chromosome related illnesses. <v Jack Lemmon>Johnson has been criticized for his methods of sampling, but Dr. Martel believes <v Jack Lemmon>he's right. <v Dr. Edward Martel>I think Carl's doing it the right way. <v Dr. Edward Martel>You have to look at the concentration of plutonium in a thin surface layer <v Dr. Edward Martel>of soil does, because this is the this is the dust kicked up. <v Dr. Edward Martel>This is material that people inhale. <v Dr. Edward Martel>And we can only estimate the lung cancer risk from inhaled plutonium <v Dr. Edward Martel>using Karl Karl Johnson's method of estimating the amount that's there. <v Interviewer>Do you still believe that the people in this area around Rocky Flats <v Interviewer>are taking a risk living here?

<v Dr. Edward Martel>Yes. The magnitude of the risk, however, is uncertain. <v Dr. Edward Martel>We're going to have to find out what the chronic health effects of plutonium really are <v Dr. Edward Martel>before we can really assess the risk. <v Dr. Edward Martel>Cancer is something that is slow to develop. <v Dr. Edward Martel>And so the full impact of cancer incidence in workers at Rocky <v Dr. Edward Martel>Flats and in people who live offsite will only unfold <v Dr. Edward Martel>itself in the next several decades. <v Interviewer>What are your findings since those days in 1969? <v Dr. Edward Martel>Well, I'm not working directly on the plutonium problem. <v Dr. Edward Martel>I'm working instead on the role of alpha emitting particles <v Dr. Edward Martel>as agents of cancer. <v Dr. Edward Martel>And we're finding that the very small amount of alpha activity in cigaret smoke <v Dr. Edward Martel>particles is the likely agent of cancer in smokers. <v Dr. Edward Martel>The amount of alpha activity in smoker's lung. <v Dr. Edward Martel>That may give rise to their cancer is 1 10000 or less than 1 10000 <v Dr. Edward Martel>of the agency's permissible level of alpha activity

<v Dr. Edward Martel>in the lung. Now, if that possibility is confirmed, it bodes <v Dr. Edward Martel>great difficulties for nuclear technology, nuclear energy. <v Dr. Edward Martel>I don't think they could live with it. <v Jack Lemmon>The barrel boondoggle happened when Rocky Flats was run by Dow Chemical. <v Jack Lemmon>Rockwell International now operates the facility, but plutonium still ends up <v Jack Lemmon>in curious places. <v Robert Yoder>We use a number of radioactive sources around the plant site for the calibration of <v Robert Yoder>instruments that are used with our processes. <v Robert Yoder>What are these sources inadvertently stored in a filing <v Robert Yoder>cabinet? And it wasn't really a procedural violation <v Robert Yoder>for that to have occurred. <v Robert Yoder>Yet it did occur. And then removing the <v Robert Yoder>source, removing some materials in the filing cabinet, the source <v Robert Yoder>inadvertently fell out on the floor and cracked, releasing a very, <v Robert Yoder>very small amount of material.

<v Robert Yoder>There were no inhalation exposures from that source, although <v Robert Yoder>there were some cleanup required in the immediate area. <v Jack Lemmon>It has been the custom of the nuclear agency used to airship plutonium around the <v Jack Lemmon>country. This was done in great secrecy in hopes of foiling <v Jack Lemmon>hijackers and also for those regulations requiring that airports be notified <v Jack Lemmon>of hazardous cargoes. <v Jack Lemmon>For the past six years, plutonium has been flown in and out of Rocky Flats through nearby <v Jack Lemmon>Jeffco Airport. <v Jack Lemmon>This spring, airport manager David Gordon noticed a plane surrounded by armed guards. <v Jack Lemmon>His efforts to find out what was going on were rebuffed and he closed the airport <v Jack Lemmon>to the flights. We asked Gordon whether he'd ever been notified that plutonium <v Jack Lemmon>was passing through his field. <v David Gordon>No, they didn't say they were going to be hauling plutonium into or out of the field. <v David Gordon>They did come to me about a year and a half ago and said they wish to use <v David Gordon>this deal. But at that point, they said it wouldn't be any.

<v Roy Lounsbury>As this type of materials happening at Rocky Flats over <v Roy Lounsbury>a period of time with respect to plutonium flying in and out of that area was known <v Roy Lounsbury>to the authorities in Colorado, within the Denver area, <v Roy Lounsbury>and quite probably personnel and authority at the airport. <v Interviewer>In the event of a crash or a fire with radiation exposure, was your <v Interviewer>field equipped to do any kind of rescue work in that case? <v David Gordon>Well, we had minor crash or a rescue in on the field, but it <v David Gordon>it could fight a fire and aircraft fire. <v David Gordon>But not knowing that radioactivity was going to be on board, <v David Gordon>I felt it was very dangerous situation for my people. <v Interviewer>Airport manager says that it would have been a disaster if it happened. <v Interviewer>His crew had nothing. They did not know that their plutonium <v Interviewer>was being carried out. So they were not equipped at all to handle any kind of radiation <v Interviewer>problem. So it would have sort of condemned them to radiation. <v Roy Lounsbury>You're assuming, first of all, that there would be a leakage, which is not at all

<v Roy Lounsbury>necessarily the case. The second thing is I do not like to get in any discussion about <v Roy Lounsbury>what the airport manager has said, because I have not talked to him personally. <v Roy Lounsbury>I have had differing reports as to what knowledge he had and what knowledge <v Roy Lounsbury>he would have been expected to have. Based on what we had informed the state of Colorado <v Roy Lounsbury>and also other authorities within that area. <v Interviewer>Have they done anything in the way of informing your people in the past ever that <v Interviewer>they were going to fly plutonium in or out of here? <v Thomas Collins>Not to my knowledge. Have your crew wasn't trained or equipped to handle any kind of a <v Thomas Collins>crash? Not at all. <v Roy Lounsbury>First off, I don't think it's fair to say that a crew would be at the scene of the <v Roy Lounsbury>accident as airport employees or in some capacity there would <v Roy Lounsbury>be unaware that hazardous material was being carried on board. <v Roy Lounsbury>It's necessary for the aircraft to advise the field before landing <v Roy Lounsbury>or prior to take off that they are carrying hazardous material. <v Interviewer>Have you ever been notified that a plane with the radioactive cargo <v Interviewer>was either flying in here or leaving from this area?

<v David Poling>No, we were not. Never. <v David Poling>Never. How long have you been here? <v David Poling>I've been here for eight years as a tower chief at this facility. <v Jack Lemmon>Defiles at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and at IRDA. <v Jack Lemmon>They are jammed with cases of negligence and mishandling of plutonium and other nuclear <v Jack Lemmon>substances. Now, for instance, there's a well known spill. <v Jack Lemmon>Edwards, Nevada test site add tens of square miles have been dusted <v Jack Lemmon>with plutonium. And years ago, on purpose, you know why scientists wondered <v Jack Lemmon>what would happen if a plane crashed that was carrying nuclear weapons. <v Jack Lemmon>So they cracked open bombs right there. <v Jack Lemmon>And guess what they found? <v Jack Lemmon>Plutonium spills. <v Jack Lemmon>And despite repeated rumors that that spillage has now gone beyond <v Jack Lemmon>the confines of the original test site, they deny it. <v Jack Lemmon>And the problem is you can't get the facts because the amount that was dumped originally <v Jack Lemmon>and the amount that is still there. Those figures are still kept secret. <v Jack Lemmon>So who knows?

<v Jack Lemmon>Oh, by the way, those repeated rumors come from IRDA science team, <v Jack Lemmon>which is rather interesting. <v Jack Lemmon>Now this this building, which is located at <v Jack Lemmon>8 0 1 North Lake Street in beautiful downtown Burbank, California, it <v Jack Lemmon>looked like this up until a couple of years ago. <v Jack Lemmon>Vacant, unguarded and contaminated with plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>The accident happened in 1968. <v Jack Lemmon>Another case of regulations ignored and plutonium mishandled. <v Jack Lemmon>Workmen cut through a plutonium beryllium source with a hacksaw because <v Jack Lemmon>a sealed glove box similar to this was out of commission. <v Jack Lemmon>They operated in an open machine shop. <v Jack Lemmon>Plutonium, of course, spilled out, was picked up by exhaust fans and spread <v Jack Lemmon>to the street. Outside, the workmen inhaled plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>They took it home on their clothes and in their cars. <v Jack Lemmon>The Atomic Energy Commission found out about the incident. <v Jack Lemmon>Days later, through an anonymous tip.

<v Jack Lemmon>The company's license was not renewed, but it was permitted to walk away after cleaning <v Jack Lemmon>up only gross contamination. <v Jack Lemmon>The building stood abandoned, but still radioactive for eight years. <v Jack Lemmon>We don't know what happened to the workers who inhaled the plutonium because their names <v Jack Lemmon>have been censored out of the Irda records. <v Jack Lemmon>Next, the worst business deal since we wrote the Indians out of Manhattan <v Jack Lemmon>for 24 bucks and beads can be found in the hills of that same state. <v Jack Lemmon>New York, this is nuclear fuel services, a plutonium reprocessing <v Jack Lemmon>plant. That was to be the start of something big. <v Jack Lemmon>It had Governor Rockefeller euphoric in 1962 when he proclaimed that the atomic <v Jack Lemmon>age, rich in challenge and opportunity stretches limitlessly into our future <v Jack Lemmon>innocence. He was right. Some things stretch endlessly into the future here. <v Jack Lemmon>Radioactive waste, hazards and costs. <v Jack Lemmon>They cranked NTFS up in 1966 and they shut it down in 1972. <v Jack Lemmon>Nobody expects it will ever operate again.

<v Jack Lemmon>There are six hundred and twelve thousand gallons of tanks stored, high level radioactive <v Jack Lemmon>liquid waste squirreled away here. <v Jack Lemmon>The throat culture is that the tank design is a trifle shy of current earthquake <v Jack Lemmon>standards is a fault. <v Jack Lemmon>Twenty three miles away, we can't show you any tanks. <v Jack Lemmon>We can't show you the million plus cubic feet of solid waste that are buried here. <v Jack Lemmon>Company officials refused interviews and wouldn't let us film inside the fence. <v Jack Lemmon>Cleanup of the liquid waste may be impossible because of tank design, obstructions and <v Jack Lemmon>the formation of a hot sludge of unknown character. <v Jack Lemmon>It costs 32 million dollars to build an office, 10 from the state, <v Jack Lemmon>the rest from W.R. Grace Company, which later sold out to the current operator. <v Jack Lemmon>Getty Oil to clean up just the liquid waste it figures they cost <v Jack Lemmon>about six hundred million dollars. <v Jack Lemmon>Now Getty is not obligated to clean it up. <v Jack Lemmon>New York can't afford two maps and a bottle of Mr. Clean.

<v Jack Lemmon>Chances are you've already guessed who is going to pick up that tab for West Valley's <v Jack Lemmon>problems. <v Jack Lemmon>Anyway, we asked Congressman Morris Udall, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and <v Jack Lemmon>Environment, what is to be done? <v Morris Udall>This is all things about nuclear. <v Morris Udall>You get your hands into the molasses and you find you can't get them out because you <v Morris Udall>never dreamed about. And I suppose rather than let it sit there and <v Morris Udall>pose these dangers to future generations of Americans, the federal government going to <v Morris Udall>have to go back in there and find some kind of a system to make it reasonably <v Morris Udall>safe here at Hanford. <v Jack Lemmon>Millions of gallons of radioactive waste are buried in the immense steel tanks nestled <v Jack Lemmon>in saucers to catch leaks. <v Jack Lemmon>And leaks have been large, small and numerous. <v Jack Lemmon>And this atomic cemetery, the waste is gradually being exhumed and solidified <v Jack Lemmon>for safer entombment, clearly. <v Jack Lemmon>Tanks are not the answer for waste that's so hot it boils on its own for years

<v Jack Lemmon>and can outlast the pyramids. <v Jack Lemmon>Still, more tanks are under construction, this time with double walls. <v Jack Lemmon>Hanford is also located in an earthquake fault region. <v Jack Lemmon>Not all nuclear critics are that happy with the president's stand on plutonium and the <v Jack Lemmon>breeders. I think that maybe it's some kind of a clever political ploy <v Jack Lemmon>in which he get the favor of both sides by supporting a cause that certain to lose. <v Jack Lemmon>In other words, the pro-nuclear forces won't take him seriously and his advocates will <v Jack Lemmon>feel that he made a valiant fight and he lost heroically. <v Jack Lemmon>Anyway, we wanted to speak to the president about a but his public relations man said <v Jack Lemmon>that the president couldn't give one on one interview. <v Jack Lemmon>So anyway, we spoke to one of his advisers, Dr. Jessica Tuckman of the National Security <v Jack Lemmon>Council. <v Interviewer>Dr. Tuckman, President Carter's tossed the anchor out on breeder reactors <v Interviewer>and on the processing of plutonium. <v Interviewer>That's a very gutsy political move. Is he serious? <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>Oh, yes. I mean, it's it's a gutsy political move.

<v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>But we feel it's entirely can be entirely justified on totally <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>sound economic grounds. And so in that regard, once we so <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>make the case, I think it will begin to sell itself <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>at this point in time. <v Interviewer>It doesn't look like he's gotten much help. Is the only man on the street. <v Interviewer>Reagan is leaving. The nations are against him. He's going to catch heat from the nuclear <v Interviewer>industry here. You think he'll stand fast? <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>Yes. And I think it's too early to make the point to reach the conclusion <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>that he's the only guy on the street. Because what you've seen so far is <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>it's very heavily the backlash of the industry, which rightly feels threatened <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>because he's saying, look, we've made a mistake, let's look again. <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>And government positions haven't really shaken down. <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>And it's going to be another six months or so before they even get their own act together <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>on what they think about this. <v Jack Lemmon>The president's decision to make it without plutonium means that we're going to have to <v Jack Lemmon>depend in part at least on ordinary nuclear plants that use uranium

<v Jack Lemmon>at ABC for years had been pushing for breeders' and plutonium because there is a shortage <v Jack Lemmon>of uranium. So we asked Dr. Tuckman, where is the uranium? <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>You've put your finger right on the key issue, which is there has got to be enough <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>uranium to satisfy world needs to at least here 2000 without <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>resorting to plutonium. <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>One of the places he's found it is in reduced expectations <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>of nuclear demand. Throughout the last 20 years, we've lived with <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>continuing to continually falling estimations of what we're going to need. <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>And it's quite clear that there's going to be less nuclear power around the world than <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>the industry has led us to believe. So that's one way. <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>The other ways is simply that we we know that there's more in the ground than we've <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>looked for. And we can make projections based on scientific theory <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>about how much is there, how much we already know. <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>And if you combine increased projections of resource availability <v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>with decreased projections of demand, you get figures that are that work.

<v Dr. Jessica Tuckman>And that's where it comes from. <v Jack Lemmon>There's thinly veiled delight in Europe over the news that the United States may be <v Jack Lemmon>backing off from the nuclear game. <v Jack Lemmon>German officials have the cramped look of those trying not to smile at the funeral of an <v Jack Lemmon>unloved but affluent relative. <v Jack Lemmon>They smell big dollars here. Tens of billions. <v Jack Lemmon>But there's more to overcome than Carter's anti-proliferation stance. <v Jack Lemmon>In Germany and other parts of Europe, anti-nuclear protests are becoming larger and more <v Jack Lemmon>violent in the long run. <v Jack Lemmon>Germany may find them tougher than the Russian winters, but the government <v Jack Lemmon>is not unprepared. <v Jack Lemmon>Meanwhile, it's on with the business at hand, making a buck with the atom.

<v Jack Lemmon>And toward that end, the head man for the German Atomic Energy Agency is not a physicist. <v Jack Lemmon>He's an economist. Former Panzer sergeant Hans Matthofer. <v Hans Matthofer>We see President Carter's problem and we <v Hans Matthofer>appreciate the seriousness of the problem. <v Hans Matthofer>And I think we are going to cooperate with him well in cooperating <v Hans Matthofer>Germany. <v Interviewer>To some critics, seems not to be cooperating because she has signed the biggest nuclear <v Interviewer>deal in history. Something on the order of $8 billion to provide reactors, uranium <v Interviewer>enrichment and plutonium reprocessing for Brazil was <v Interviewer>long before President Carter's time. <v Hans Matthofer>And in having a trilateral agreement with the International <v Hans Matthofer>Atomic Energy Organization, the American and the Soviet <v Hans Matthofer>governor approved of the treaty. <v Hans Matthofer>If there is a new awareness of the plutonium problem in all <v Hans Matthofer>of the world, we should actively cooperate. <v Hans Matthofer>And I mean actively in reaching an agreement

<v Hans Matthofer>to have a better control of the problems arising. <v Hans Matthofer>Always, of course, taking into consideration our interest and <v Hans Matthofer>take care that we are not discriminated against. <v Interviewer>The French have a deal with Pakistan, which they're going to build a reprocessing <v Interviewer>plant in the event that France pulled out from Pakistan. <v Interviewer>Wouldn't Germany go for that business as well? <v Interviewer>We would not. Would Germany go for any business in addition to <v Interviewer>the Brazilian deal? <v Hans Matthofer>I don't see any such deal in <v Hans Matthofer>the world. As far as I can see, we <v Hans Matthofer>should. We will not repeat the Brazilian deal. <v Interviewer>We could supply uranium to Germany, which he forego plutonium. <v Hans Matthofer>We would consider it. <v Hans Matthofer>To what conclusion? We would arrive after the process of <v Hans Matthofer>consideration. I could not say now. <v Jack Lemmon>Following the interview, Mr. Matthofer they said that Germany has little choice but to

<v Jack Lemmon>proceed with the Brazilian deal. He said this was because Germany has never broken <v Jack Lemmon>a treaty. <v Jack Lemmon>In Paris, just a taxi ride from Vici, we met with French officials to <v Jack Lemmon>discuss the big push in France towards breeder reactors and plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>France has emerged as the world leader in nuclear technology. <v Jack Lemmon>But while the French lead in some areas, they lag in others, notably when it comes to <v Jack Lemmon>waste storage. There is nothing, for instance, to match the Germans elaborate plans to <v Jack Lemmon>bury their atomic leftovers in salt caves in France, as in <v Jack Lemmon>Germany. There is the galloping growth of public resistance to nuclear expansion. <v Jack Lemmon>The latest and the largest demonstration was held this summer at the site of Super <v Jack Lemmon>Phenix, a huge new breeder reactor being built at mÃthavya. <v Jack Lemmon>Thirty thousand protested.

<v Jack Lemmon>One was killed. <v Jack Lemmon>Significantly, the demonstrators came from throughout Europe. <v Jack Lemmon>We asked France's top nuclear official, Andre jeho, about France's plans. <v Speaker>Our government shares completely the objectives of President Carter <v Speaker>about nonproliferation. <v Speaker>We think that the peace of world in the future <v Speaker>relates with a sufficient supply of energy. <v Speaker>That means the development of nuclear energy for many countries. <v Speaker>But at the same time, we think that the development of nuclear energy must be performed <v Speaker>in such a way that the proliferation of <v Speaker>nuclear weapons is avoided. <v Interviewer>France has made a deal, signed an agreement to provide facilities for <v Interviewer>Pakistan. Pakistan is a poverty stricken nation and as <v Interviewer>per capita income, something on the order of one hundred and twenty dollars per year.

<v Interviewer>Does it really make any sense for Pakistan to build a reprocessing plant? <v Interviewer>Well, it could very well economically reprocess its rods in France. <v Speaker>This is a question that you should ask to the Pakistani's government. <v Speaker>As far as France is concerned, these Pakistanis deal has been <v Speaker>discussed for, I think, more than twelve years. <v Speaker>And I think that when a big country like France <v Speaker>signed to contract, it just <v Speaker>executes the contract. <v Speaker>You exudes confidence. But there may be a touch of bravado behind that smile, because not <v Speaker>all of France's scientists are in his camp last May. <v Speaker>Five hundred and four others send an open letter to President Bush saying demanding that <v Speaker>he suspend operations on super phoenicks. <v Speaker>Nuclear power is attractive to many countries with meager fossil resources. <v Speaker>They say, let's go nuclear. Or not at all.

<v Jack Lemmon>And nowhere is the situation more acute than here in Japan. <v Jack Lemmon>One hundred ten million people are crowded into an area the size of Montana. <v Jack Lemmon>With few resources, it is still one of the most industrialized countries on the globe. <v Jack Lemmon>The nuclear program is thriving, but opposition is strong and increasing. <v Jack Lemmon>Japan's energy chief, Akira Oyama, says plutonium is vital for <v Jack Lemmon>his country. <v Akira Oyama>In view of the growing energy needs all over the world, <v Akira Oyama>we cannot remain optimistic for the future supply of uranium <v Akira Oyama>ores to ?depend?. <v Akira Oyama>We hope to reduce uranium consumption by plutonium ?mitigation?. <v Jack Lemmon>How much uh energy is provided by nuclear power at this <v Jack Lemmon>time? <v Akira Oyama>Uh 70 percent in our electrical power. <v Jack Lemmon>And uh in the future. <v Jack Lemmon>What uh percentage do you think-. <v Akira Oyama>Um, I, I suppose uh 40 percent in turn of century. <v Jack Lemmon>Real concern for keeping plutonium out of the hands of terrorists has caused Japan to

<v Jack Lemmon>set up a safeguards division this year. <v Jack Lemmon>For the most part, international hopes for safeguards have been vested in the <v Jack Lemmon>International Atomic Energy Agency that's headquartered in Vienna. <v Jack Lemmon>IAEA is an atomic auditor. <v Jack Lemmon>It was founded in 1957 and is now a key element in making the nonproliferation <v Jack Lemmon>treaty work. Inspectors check nuclear facilities in various nations to <v Jack Lemmon>assure that plutonium is not being diverted for military purposes. <v Jack Lemmon>It does a good job, but in a hopeless situation, as Don Widener found when he talked <v Jack Lemmon>with the agency deputy director for safeguards, Rudolf Ramadge. <v Rudolf Ramadge>From all the nuclear weapons states, uh only two have made an offer <v Rudolf Ramadge>to put their civil nuclear power under our safeguards. <v Rudolf Ramadge>The others are outside. <v Rudolf Ramadge>And then there are a few who have only part of their nuclear activities <v Rudolf Ramadge>under other safeguards agreements.

<v Jack Lemmon>Brazil has not signed the Non Proliferation Treaty. <v Rudolf Ramadge>No. <v Jack Lemmon>But it will allow your men to inspect. <v Rudolf Ramadge>Oh, we have already concluded a so-called trilateral agreement where the <v Rudolf Ramadge>Federal Republic of Germany, Brazil and our agency are the three <v Rudolf Ramadge>partners. <v Interviewer>Supposing a nation wish to destroy that, it could simply tear it up, nationalize <v Interviewer>the industry and tell you to get out and go ahead and make its bombs. <v Interviewer>Is that not correct? <v Rudolf Ramadge>That has always been like that with all kinds of treaties. <v Interviewer>You have no enforcement capability, is that right? <v Rudolf Ramadge>Our mandate is to detect diversion and to make the necessary alarm. <v Interviewer>But there is nothing you can do beyond that. <v Rudolf Ramadge>No, we have no army. We are we are an international organization <v Rudolf Ramadge>sponsored by the governments and the interest of those governments. <v Rudolf Ramadge>We do that work and inform the governments, Security Council, our <v Rudolf Ramadge>member states as rapidly as possible so that they who have the power <v Rudolf Ramadge>can take the necessary measures. <v Interviewer>You're unable to inspect the weapons, making facilities

<v Interviewer>completely unable. <v Rudolf Ramadge>Yes. <v Interviewer>Well, doesn't that mean you're guarding three sides of the fort and the entire back door <v Interviewer>is open? <v Rudolf Ramadge>Well, if you call that the back door, then it's open. <v Jack Lemmon>Few events in history have been able to ruffle the traditional composure of the British, <v Jack Lemmon>but nothing has come as close in years as what the British press is calling the most <v Jack Lemmon>important social and industrial debate of the century. <v Jack Lemmon>The plan to construct a billion dollar plutonium reprocessing plant at wind scale <v Jack Lemmon>on the Irish Sea. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, this despite having a surplus of energy production capacity, not to mention <v Jack Lemmon>big new North Sea oil, finds a high court judge. <v Jack Lemmon>Mr Justice Parker has been appointed chairman for an unparalleled public hearing

<v Jack Lemmon>on the matter. Justice Parker has said the decision may affect not only <v Jack Lemmon>those alive and residing in the neighborhood, but also those who live far away <v Jack Lemmon>and those who will not be born for many, many years ahead. <v Jack Lemmon>It's an unlikely setting for such doings. <v Jack Lemmon>Folks haven't seen the leg of this since John Paul Jones pulled off a one day raid here <v Jack Lemmon>at White Haven during the revolution. <v Jack Lemmon>Behind this bucolic tapestry is tension. <v Jack Lemmon>The people around here remember that there's already been trouble at wind scale, an <v Jack Lemmon>accident and fire. Years ago, they contaminated hundreds of square miles with radiation. <v Jack Lemmon>Crops and milk had to be condemned and destroyed for months. <v Jack Lemmon>Such goings on are not taken lightly.

<v Jack Lemmon>This is the renowned Lake District, a favorite holiday site and the location of the much <v Jack Lemmon>loved Cockermouth Castle, Britishers flock here to relax <v Jack Lemmon>and visit the castle, just as Mary Queen of Scots did in 15 68. <v Jack Lemmon>Nobody here is without an opinion, including the Cockermouth Castle Keeper, Mr. R.E. <v Jack Lemmon>Burden, after a pint of old peculiar beer. <v Jack Lemmon>He spoke his mind. <v R.E. Burden>Well, it didn't really affect me, really, because, sir, if you numbers <v R.E. Burden>up, you're number's up, I mean, you go to work in a coal mine and you'll get silicosis. <v R.E. Burden>We'll get you over there. <v R.E. Burden>We're going to tend to fucking get blown up tomorrow. <v R.E. Burden>So the daily and it doesn't worry me. <v R.E. Burden>Some people do worry. They said they wouldn't eat the fish out there, saying there was a <v R.E. Burden>fall out of the habit. We have no proof of that. <v R.E. Burden>I would go get a job. That's a model because it's hard to take all the precautions again. <v R.E. Burden>And then it's a depressed area. So we want work, don't we?

<v R.E. Burden>And there's no way at all times are the people you got left. <v R.E. Burden>So it really. So I suppose I'm Friday. <v R.E. Burden>It really brings work into the area. <v Jack Lemmon>Other Cockermouthians are split on the issue. <v Jack Lemmon>I'm not particularly worried. <v Woman on Street>I know I should be, but I'm not. I feel that we have to have in this country something <v Woman on Street>like we scanned and it's got to be quick some way. <v Woman on Street>It might not be put in this part of the country as anywhere else. <v Woman on Street>It's dangerous enough as it is. <v Man on Street>Well, I think would be too big already. No big deal. <v Man on Street>Anything goes wrong. <v Man on Street 2>If it goes wrong on Cumberland and that's it. <v Man on Street 2>We've all gone. Not some of us. <v Man on Street 2>All of us. We should be well out of it. <v Man on Street 2>You know, miles and miles away, the farther the better. <v Jack Lemmon>Sweden is one of the most advanced nations, and here the decision on nuclear

<v Jack Lemmon>power, including breeders' and plutonium, has been made. <v Jack Lemmon>It's no thanks. <v Jack Lemmon>A new non-socialist government was swept into power recently, largely <v Jack Lemmon>on the issue of nuclear power. <v Carl Bilot>There was a reaction in the early 1970s in Sweden against a lot of things <v Carl Bilot>large breeches, computers, nuclear power. <v Carl Bilot>We've talked about the green wave, go back to the countryside, to the nice <v Carl Bilot>old times. <v Carl Bilot>Then, of course, that resulted in a major debate on nuclear power. <v Carl Bilot>And then it was the dangers of not the economics <v Carl Bilot>of it. Because I think that in a country like Sweden, most people agree that <v Carl Bilot>nuclear power is very economic.

<v Carl Bilot>We have no domestic energy resources longer that we could that <v Carl Bilot>we could take use of in the future. If the energy commission, a large commission, <v Carl Bilot>is going to recommend that we gradually <v Carl Bilot>abandon nuclear power. It will take a long time. <v Carl Bilot>But the important thing then will not be the final date that the shift of <v Carl Bilot>direction, I believe. <v Carl Bilot>But it remains to be seen. <v Carl Bilot>I think we will be dependent on nuclear power to a certain extent or at least the next <v Carl Bilot>10, 15 years. <v Jack Lemmon>Despite their high living standards, the Swedes are rejecting the products of super <v Jack Lemmon>technology. <v Jack Lemmon>With all the benefits, divorce and suicide rates are soaring. <v Jack Lemmon>People are looking to the countryside, their roots, the nice old <v Jack Lemmon>times. <v Jack Lemmon>Perhaps like Gandhi, they decided there's more to life than increasing its speed. <v Jack Lemmon>It's a marathon. Oh, there is support for the atom. <v Jack Lemmon>But it's lonely.

<v Protestors>[speaking in Swedish] <v Jack Lemmon>And despised. <v Jack Lemmon>[protestors on street, shouting in Swedish] Sweden's new course was outlined for us <v Jack Lemmon>by minister of Energy. Olaf Johanssen. <v Olaf Johanssen>I think it's very important to countries like the states, Sweden, which have a very <v Olaf Johanssen>high level of energy use, really put their resources <v Olaf Johanssen>in technological field and in the resources <v Olaf Johanssen>of capital to make it possible to to <v Olaf Johanssen>to have a real conservation of energy. <v Olaf Johanssen>I mean, we couldn't use energy as we use <v Olaf Johanssen>water. And because we have certain restrictions <v Olaf Johanssen>all over the world, the world is full of restrictions, but we haven't <v Olaf Johanssen>looked at them first until now. <v Olaf Johanssen>I think the restrictions must be guiding us when we

<v Olaf Johanssen>judge the possibilities to produce energy, not the opposite way, <v Olaf Johanssen>not how much we could produce, but to see how much energy <v Olaf Johanssen>do we really use the use need. <v Olaf Johanssen>And then we have certain limits of security and of environment <v Olaf Johanssen>possibilities of development <v Olaf Johanssen>and research in the long run. <v Olaf Johanssen>We have the means we are prepared to use <v Olaf Johanssen>to have the energy policy <v Olaf Johanssen>going that the way we we we want and we <v Olaf Johanssen>have the possibilities of conservation. <v Olaf Johanssen>And we must try all these for the <v Olaf Johanssen>means to come right. <v Olaf Johanssen>When we decide to level, we really need <v Olaf Johanssen>to use of energy. And that must be also a

<v Olaf Johanssen>thing for democratic democratic <v Olaf Johanssen>process in the countries that people must accept. <v Olaf Johanssen>What we do in this field and I think they <v Olaf Johanssen>are ready to take an increasing part of the responsibility. <v Olaf Johanssen>It's not only a thing for technicians or politicians. <v Jack Lemmon>It sounds like a cliche, but sometimes great issues are decided <v Jack Lemmon>by the actions of one man and it just may be so in the case of a staff analyst <v Jack Lemmon>for the safeguards division of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. <v Jack Lemmon>James Conrad was assigned duties dealing with MOF material <v Jack Lemmon>unaccounted for. That's nuclear material, plutonium, uranium <v Jack Lemmon>that is missing from the inventories. <v Jack Lemmon>And he was part of a group that was investigating the feasibility of the CFE, <v Jack Lemmon>a clandestine fission explosion. <v Jack Lemmon>That means could somebody steal plutonium and make a bomb?

<v Jack Lemmon>And the information or the lack of it worried him and he wasn't satisfied <v Jack Lemmon>with the actions and answers from his superiors. <v Jack Lemmon>So he sat down and he wrote an open letter to President Carter. <v Jack Lemmon>We talked to him. We asked Conrad and what prompted him to do this. <v James Conran>Nearly always, either the very existence of the information <v James Conran>would be denied or any knowledge of the existence of the information would be denied <v James Conran>very frequently. Misleading information would <v James Conran>be given to me. The control of information has been exercised in a fashion <v James Conran>that it has acted as a common mode failure mechanism <v James Conran>for all of the checks and balances in the system. <v James Conran>I think it's also possible that there is an advocacy <v James Conran>role, the flavor of antiwar advocacy on the part of the agencies and <v James Conran>in suppressing information that is potentially embarrassing or <v James Conran>something that.

<v Interviewer>You mean they advocate nuclear power and anything that embarrasses that they try to <v Interviewer>suppress? Is that what you're saying? <v James Conran>That's that's generally the idea. <v James Conran>Yes. <v Jack Lemmon>For the other side of the story, we talked to Harvey Lyon at IRDA. <v Jack Lemmon>It's learned how much plutonium is unaccounted for in this country. <v Harvey Lyon>There is no evidence that any plutonium is unaccounted for in this country. <v Harvey Lyon>All the evidence that is been collected through our safeguards, records, <v Harvey Lyon>analyzed and verified would indicate that we know where the <v Harvey Lyon>material is if it ever existed. <v Interviewer>How good is the existence of these materials? <v James Conran>Well, it's it's it's sufficiently <v James Conran>poor that to this day, in the instance <v James Conran>of excessive months, it's still not possible to say anything <v James Conran>other than it could be an error in the <v James Conran>accounting system. It could be in pipes or ducts. <v James Conran>It could be in effluence which go into the river,

<v James Conran>but it could be stolen. It also could be stolen. <v James Conran>Yes. And because of weaknesses in our <v James Conran>physical protection and control and containment measures employed <v James Conran>at these facilities, that explanation is at least as credible <v James Conran>as the other ones, malevolent ones. <v Harvey Lyon>There is no evidence that any significant amount of plutonium has ever been stolen in <v Harvey Lyon>this country. In fact, there is no evidence that anyone ever attempted to <v Harvey Lyon>steal plutonium in this country. <v James Conran>The fact that there exists intelligence information indicating <v James Conran>which belies the agency's public position, that there <v James Conran>is no evidence or indication whatsoever that any material has ever been stolen, <v James Conran>I think should be known publicly. <v Jack Lemmon>One of Conran's concerns has the look of a developing scandal.

<v Jack Lemmon>What happened to 200 pounds of nuclear bomb material that vanished from this facility <v Jack Lemmon>in the mid 60s? <v Jack Lemmon>The Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, gnomic and Apollo, Pennsylvania, <v Jack Lemmon>now operated by Babcock and Wilcox, was a privately owned processing <v Jack Lemmon>plant. It handled S and M special nuclear materials, <v Jack Lemmon>meaning weapons grade plutonium and uranium. <v Jack Lemmon>In this case, it was enriched uranium that came up missing enough for several atom <v Jack Lemmon>bombs. A worried 80C investigate. <v Jack Lemmon>The FBI refused to. <v Jack Lemmon>It's all very cloak and dagger, although IRDA insists nothing has been stolen. <v Jack Lemmon>Something is being hidden from you. <v Jack Lemmon>The task force report on Conrads allegations about Apollo mentions information <v Jack Lemmon>that is, quote, extremely sensitive, unquote. <v Jack Lemmon>It's so sensitive. The task force didn't even bother to ask what it is. <v Jack Lemmon>CIA told us it knew nothing of the affair.

<v Jack Lemmon>Two weeks later, we turned up the existence of a top secret CIA memo about Apollo <v Jack Lemmon>in the Irda files. <v Jack Lemmon>The hottest scenario has the uranium being stolen and shipped to Israel. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, this story has some credence because. No. <v Jack Lemmon>He's known to have had dealings with Israel, a joint venture for the irradiation of <v Jack Lemmon>fruits and vegetables. Details of the vegetable program were handled through the Israeli <v Jack Lemmon>Defense Ministry in New York. <v Jack Lemmon>Another rumor says the uranium was secretly swapped with Israel for a shuttle bomber <v Jack Lemmon>basis. <v Jack Lemmon>If the material was stolen or diverted, as our government has want to say, then <v Jack Lemmon>it would have to be without the knowledge of Congress and it would be a capital offense. <v Jack Lemmon>We asked Mr. Lyons about the intelligence report. <v Interviewer>Isn't it the fact that at least one intelligence agency filed a report <v Interviewer>stating that they felt that it had been stolen and that they knew who did it? <v Harvey Lyon>Not to my knowledge. That may be a fact, but investigations were conducted <v Harvey Lyon>in everything that I've seen would indicate that it had been stolen.

<v Harvey Lyon>But they paid eight hundred thousand dollars for something that was missing. <v Harvey Lyon>They would have had to sell it. And it's still missing. <v Harvey Lyon>They would have had to pay for that. <v Harvey Lyon>Under the terms of the contract. So it's still missing. <v Harvey Lyon>Yes, but that's. But that's not unusual in a plant <v Harvey Lyon>of this type of operation. It would go into discharges into a <v Harvey Lyon>tank. It's not economical to recover it. <v Harvey Lyon>It costs more to recover it than it does to to <v Harvey Lyon>leave it there. <v Interviewer>Have you seen yourself in intelligence report covering <v Interviewer>this? I do not claim to have ever seen. <v Interviewer>You seem to infer that this was investigated by some intelligence agencies. <v James Conran>Yes. <v Jack Lemmon>The big question. Was it stolen? <v Jack Lemmon>Conrad believes it's the logical answer. <v James Conran>If you if you think about things the way I do, it strikes me that <v James Conran>the more sinister explanation is the one that is logically

<v James Conran>consistent with all of the information. <v James Conran>It was apparent that it would be relatively easy to steal <v James Conran>significant quantities of enriched uranium or plutonium <v James Conran>from existing licensed facilities, either <v James Conran>from the outside overt attacks or <v James Conran>surreptitiously from the inside. <v James Conran>The information provided in the reports of the study of <v James Conran>the clandestine decision explosives study had produced <v James Conran>results that indicated that <v James Conran>the design and fabrication of a workable fusion explosive should be considered <v James Conran>relatively easy and likely to succeed. <v Jack Lemmon>Mr. Conrad was transferred to a non-sensitive position.

<v Jack Lemmon>Would it be all that simple for someone to make an atomic bomb? <v Jack Lemmon>No. But it ain't all that hard either. <v Jack Lemmon>I got here a recipe for a bomb, and I'm not kidding. <v Jack Lemmon>Anybody can get this. This is a sworn affidavit from a court records state of New York. <v Jack Lemmon>It tells you how to whip up a plutonium weapon right in your own kitchen. <v Jack Lemmon>I'll show you. Let's go. <v Jack Lemmon>There's a couple of chemical conversions and these instructions that I'm going to skip <v Jack Lemmon>over for the obvious reasons, but these are the basic ingredients. <v Jack Lemmon>First, the of plutonium, the size of this melon or a grapefruit could weigh up to about <v Jack Lemmon>18 or 20 pounds. Those couple of steel mixing bowl, some <v Jack Lemmon>wax, very important. <v Jack Lemmon>And next, some C-4 plastic explosive. <v Jack Lemmon>I'm using dope and got a detonator, which you can make yourself or <v Jack Lemmon>you can buy at a store. Unfortunately, a Geiger counter <v Jack Lemmon>and a scattering iron and that's it. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, first step, we're gonna melt this wax and make a three inch thickness

<v Jack Lemmon>in each bowl and cover the inside of each bowl. <v Jack Lemmon>I'm not gonna take the time to do that now. So we will assume that we have now made a <v Jack Lemmon>three inch thickness of wax in each bowl. <v Jack Lemmon>The wax acts as a neutron reflector. <v Jack Lemmon>Then all you do is you plug in the plutonium in one half <v Jack Lemmon>and now we are merely gonna sodder the two hands together. <v Jack Lemmon>But while we are scattering that, we are going to place this Geiger counter very <v Jack Lemmon>close to the bomb, because if it starts yammering at you, it's trying to tell you two <v Jack Lemmon>things. Number one, you probably made a mistake in your calculation somewhere <v Jack Lemmon>and you better start dismantling this right away because the second thing is trying to <v Jack Lemmon>tell you it's gonna blow up. All right. <v Jack Lemmon>We will assume that it doesn't Yamma we then Sadr it together. <v Jack Lemmon>Now we're going to take the plastic explosive. <v Jack Lemmon>And this isn't going to work, obviously, but you would spread it evenly around the bomb <v Jack Lemmon>and then all you would do is take the detonator and you plug it in there <v Jack Lemmon>and voila. Simple as it seems.

<v Jack Lemmon>Now, one more step. We take a look outside. <v Jack Lemmon>Neighborhoods still here. Must've done something right. <v Jack Lemmon>I guess some of you might have thought that was a rather inane little routine. <v Jack Lemmon>I went through there. There was a very good reason for doing it. <v Jack Lemmon>I don't think that most people have any conception of how frighteningly simple <v Jack Lemmon>it is to put together atomic bomb crude <v Jack Lemmon>but workable. If you had the plutonium, that is the key. <v Jack Lemmon>You don't have to be some kind of a scientist, not or a terrorist were able to get a hold <v Jack Lemmon>of enough plutonium. If he was smart enough to get it, he's gonna be smart enough to put <v Jack Lemmon>it together. <v Jack Lemmon>If he doesn't blow himself up when he is making it look out. <v Jack Lemmon>Chances are it's going to work. <v Jack Lemmon>The whole thing is having the plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>That is the key. What would the millions of pounds of plutonium that are gonna be <v Jack Lemmon>circulating this earth if we're not careful in the future?

<v Jack Lemmon>How good are our safeguards? That's the important thing. <v Jack Lemmon>So far, they're not very good. <v Jack Lemmon>The government has voluminous reports on the problems. <v Jack Lemmon>An example, a small a security guard was hired despite the fact that he had <v Jack Lemmon>a lengthy criminal record, including a 20 year stretch for bank robbery. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, this is a security guard at a nuclear materials company that was government <v Jack Lemmon>licensed. <v Jack Lemmon>Well, what if what if a terrorist got sick of hijacking those little <v Jack Lemmon>747s and he got his hands somehow a rather odd enough plutonium <v Jack Lemmon>to fill a few of those little mixing bowls? <v Jack Lemmon>What if and then what if the president got a really <v Jack Lemmon>weird phone call. <v Jack Lemmon>Would the president be ready to trade whatever for three cities in 24 <v Jack Lemmon>hours. It's not such a crazy thought. <v Jack Lemmon>We asked Dr. Arthur Tamplin, a staff scientist with the Natural Resources Defense <v Jack Lemmon>Council, what the president's options be. <v Arthur Tamplin>The only options that are left for him would be to sacrifice cities. <v Arthur Tamplin>This is the terrible thing about the potential for nuclear blackmail,

<v Arthur Tamplin>is that your options are narrowed down to the point where you simply can't tolerate <v Arthur Tamplin>the existence of a nuclear bomb as a consequence. <v Arthur Tamplin>If we move into the point here at a time when we have lots <v Arthur Tamplin>of plutonium in the civilian sectors of society, our options will be very narrow. <v Arthur Tamplin>And in order to prevent nuclear blackmail, we will simply have to become <v Arthur Tamplin>police state. <v Arthur Tamplin>Our civil liberties will just disappear because there is no way that a society <v Arthur Tamplin>can exist under the pressure of nuclear blackmail. <v Morris Udall>Well, I just hope that they'll never come. And I think there's a tendency on the part of <v Morris Udall>all of us all over the world to put that out of her mind. <v Morris Udall>But it's very real. I have no doubt that Hitler, who was within 24 <v Morris Udall>months probably developing his own bomb. <v Morris Udall>He used it in precisely that fashion. <v Morris Udall>Idi Amin, Uganda, Uganda's got a few bombs. <v Morris Udall>There are going to be leaders that the rest of this century there are going to be leaders

<v Morris Udall>like Hitler Lady or me and subnational groups as well who probably have <v Morris Udall>the capacity to put it together. <v Morris Udall>And it would be the most anguishing kind of time for any leader to <v Morris Udall>be put in a position to demand your billion dollars and release all the <v Morris Udall>prisoners in the jail. I guess the temptation to give me a billion dollars and release <v Morris Udall>all the murderers in the jail would have to be have to be done. <v Morris Udall>But I don't know, it's it's a problem I hope we never have to face <v Morris Udall>if God willing, this problem never arises. <v Jack Lemmon>There's something else and it hasn't even better chance of victory with so much <v Jack Lemmon>of our future dependent upon nuclear energy. <v Jack Lemmon>What's going to happen if there's an accident involving loss of life? <v Morris Udall>I think it would depend on the circumstance of the accident. <v Morris Udall>An unusual thing, a meteorite or an airplane crashes into a planet. <v Morris Udall>It's a one time thing that doesn't go to the basic safety of the planet. <v Morris Udall>Probably not too much would happen. On the other hand, if you ever have an accident in <v Morris Udall>which substantial numbers of people are hurt under situations, it suggests that <v Morris Udall>all of our assumptions about the safety of nuclear power generation are wrong.

<v Morris Udall>Then bar the door and probably have incredible <v Morris Udall>results. <v Morris Udall>Just economically, a recession rivaling that of the 1930s. <v Morris Udall>If you suddenly shut down 10 or 15 or 20 percent of the <v Morris Udall>electrical power production in this country, you'd get a real emergency. <v Morris Udall>And it would really test us as a people how we'd react to that kind of an event. <v Morris Udall>But I think it would depend on the circumstances of the event. <v Arthur Tamplin>The general consensus there among both anti-nuclear people and nuclear <v Arthur Tamplin>proponents is that a major accident in a nuclear power plant would shut <v Arthur Tamplin>the industry down. <v Arthur Tamplin>And this is one of the real problems with the way nuclear <v Arthur Tamplin>reactors had been built. <v Arthur Tamplin>If we would reach the point where, say, nuclear was supplying half of our electricity <v Arthur Tamplin>to shut them down would would be a tremendous problem for <v Arthur Tamplin>the country. But we would have to. <v Arthur Tamplin>So it makes you know, from that standpoint alone, it makes poor economic sense

<v Arthur Tamplin>to put so many in the nuclear basket. <v Jack Lemmon>Those are the opinions of a nuclear critic and politician. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, what would a nuclear proponent believe? <v Jack Lemmon>We asked Japan's Akira oyama. <v Interviewer>In the event of such an accident, what effect do you think it would have that. <v Akira Oyama>Big effect. <v Interviewer>Do you think that would be the end of nuclear power? <v Akira Oyama>Yes. <v Jack Lemmon>I was reading an article in my newspaper the other day, it told about a guy who was <v Jack Lemmon>promoting worms for food and he eats them all. <v Jack Lemmon>He says they're terrific and they're filled with protein. <v Jack Lemmon>And you French fry them and they're delicious. <v Jack Lemmon>Well, I don't that maybe he's right, but I don't think he's going to make a nickel. <v Jack Lemmon>I wouldn't eat a worm if you put a bazooka to my head. <v Jack Lemmon>But I was wondering if the nuclear industry <v Jack Lemmon>would ever pay attention to a crazy thing like that because they could learn a lesson. <v Jack Lemmon>I think more people are realizing that not everything new is better <v Jack Lemmon>and they're bulking in Sweden.

<v Jack Lemmon>That turning away is known as the green wave. <v Jack Lemmon>Now, we don't have a name for it yet in this country, but it is here and it is growing. <v Jack Lemmon>How we all want progress when progress means quadraphonic <v Jack Lemmon>sound or painless dentist drills. <v Jack Lemmon>But does it have to mean ever that you can see water with lumps <v Jack Lemmon>in it or bombs that can zap people and still leave the house standing, <v Jack Lemmon>which means the mortgage company is still free and clear? <v Jack Lemmon>Good lord, you can't put your finger exactly on it, this mood <v Jack Lemmon>of the people. But I do know this. It knocked out the S S T and it winged the Concorde <v Jack Lemmon>and it has nothin' to do with logic. The Swedes turned their back on nuclear power and <v Jack Lemmon>design, they cannot afford to. The country's in economic trouble, right? <v Jack Lemmon>It makes total sense for them to use nuclear power, <v Jack Lemmon>but that doesn't make any difference. They said no. <v Jack Lemmon>You see, they're going back to the nice old times, the simpler days. <v Jack Lemmon>If they have to rub a couple of sticks together and take up bundling, okay, that is

<v Jack Lemmon>it. <v Jack Lemmon>I think it boils down to this. <v Jack Lemmon>The nuclear promoters see a future filled with plutonium. <v Jack Lemmon>The environmentalists see a future filled with disaster. <v Jack Lemmon>We can only hope they're not both right. <v Jack Lemmon>That would make today the nice old times. <v Man 2>The source inadvertently fell out on the floor and cracked. <v Man 3>I think we're in for some more surprises in this area. <v Man 4>Always, of course, taking into consideration our interest. <v Man 5>When a big country like France signs a contract, <v Man 5>it just uh executes the contract. <v Man 6>There is no evidence that any significant amount of plutonium has ever been stolen in <v Man 6>this country. <v Man 7>Well, if you call that the back door, then it's open. <v Man 7>Yes [chuckles] <v Woman 5>You've put your finger right on the key issue. <v Man 8>The only options that are left for him would be to sacrifice cities.

<v Man 9>This is all things about nuclear. <v Man 9>You get your hands into the molasses and you find you can't get 'em out. <v Man 10>It's not only a thing for technicians or politicians. <v Woman 1>Plutonium? I don't even know what plutonium is, <v Woman 1>really. <v Narrator>This program was produced by KCET, which is solely responsible <v Narrator>for its content. [PBS theme plays]