-Caveat Lector- from: http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ <A HREF="http://www.aci.net/kalliste/">The Home Page of J. Orlin Grabbe</A> ----- Nuclear Accidents Japanese Nuke Workers Were Just Making Cookies First, mix uranium hexafluoride with nitric acid in a bucket. A SERIES of grotesque blunders by inexperienced staff, combined with inadequate safety procedures at the Tokaimura nuclear plant, lay behind Japan's worst nuclear accident, the company which runs the installation conceded yesterday. >From the accounts of three workers severely injured in Thursday's inadvertent nuclear reaction, it emerged that staff bypassed normal procedures to mix a uranium-nitric acid solution in a stainless steel bucket by hand. As a result, there was a small explosion, followed by an uncontained nuclear reaction which sent radiation spewing into the atmosphere, forcing 300,000 people in a four-mile radius of the plant to stay in their homes. The three workers had been mixing uranium hexafluoride with nitric acid to make fuel for a nuclear power plant. There are supposed to be three stages: first the uranium hexafluoride is dissolved in nitric acid in a solution tank. It is then pumped to a storage tank and then to a settling tank. But according to one of them - Yutaka Yokoyama, 54 - the employees ignored most of the procedure, and used neither a solution tank nor a storage tank, preferring to mix it directly in the bucket. The three men were also very inexperienced. For two of them it was the first time they had tried to perform the procedure, while the third had done it only a few times. They also attempted to process eight times the normal amount of uranium. Under the company's rules, only 2.4 kilograms of uranium should be processed at once in order to prevent a "criticality incident" of the sort which caused the accident. The three tried to process 16 kilograms of the material in one go. It is not clear whether the violation of the rules was due to sheer ignorance or whether they were trying to cut corners. Much of the information on the accident came from Mr Yokoyama, the oldest member of the team involved in the accident, who was the least affected by radiation and is able to walk. The other two have very low counts of white blood cells and red burn marks on their skin - classic symptoms of radiation poisoning. Bone marrow transplants are being considered for the three men. Radiation levels in the town of Tokaimura, 90 miles north-east of Tokyo, were back to normal yesterday allowing people to leave their homes for the first time since the incident occurred on Thursday. Few people ventured out into the streets even after the all clear. JCO, the company which runs the plant, said safety rules had been violated. A spokesman said: "We have no words to express our apologies. We cannot escape our responsibility since our employees violated company rules and the incident was deplorable." Police are questioning company officials and criminal negligence charges may be brought. But the company also admitted that the facility where the accident took place had inadequate safety equipment. There were no glove boxes to keep workers away from radioactive materials, no robots nor remote control systems. The plant also did not have a control rod, used to control critical state reactions. Details of the incompetence that led to the catastrophe have appalled the Japanese public. A series of recent accidents at nuclear plants had already undermined confidence but the idea that workers were flouting procedures and inventing their own Heath Robinson measures was beyond the comprehension of many. Jinzaburo Takagi, the leader of the Citizens' Nuclear Information Centre, said: "It's most incredible to me. There has to be a review not just of this plant but of the whole industry." While there was a sense of relief that the situation had not been more grave, there was also a feeling that it could have been avoided. There is likely to be much anger if the government does not order a full inquiry. The London Telegraph, October 2, 1999 Gold Market Gold's Reverse Gear Vroooooom! Vroooooooom! Crash! Imagine slamming a moving car into reverse gear. You can expect lots of grinding noises, and probably some damage to the machinery. That is what happened to the gold market this week. Gold has been meandering downwards in value since 1980, when it was worth $850 an ounce. That trend had accelerated in the past five months - until a sudden recovery in the space of two and a half days last week. Having fallen to $250 an ounce a few weeks ago, gold is now above $300, a level it has not held since last year. The immediate cause of these gyrations is market anxiety about possible future sales by the world's central banks. Even though gold long ago lost its role as the anchor of the world financial system, many central banks still hold large reserves. But some countries have been selling up; and others, such as Britain and Switzerland, are following suit. The sharp fall in the price of gold since May was accelerated by Britain's decision that it will sell 415 tonnes, more than half its reserves. Its recovery followed last Sunday's announcement that total European bank sales will be limited to 2,000 tonnes over five years and 400 tonnes in any single year. The restrictions allow Britain and Switzerland (which intends to sell 1,300 tonnes) to go ahead with their plans. There is a further factor. Over the past 10 years, a large and complex market in gold derivatives - over the counter loans, forwards, futures and options - has developed. It was based on the ready supply of gold available for loan from central banks at rates of interest below those for money. Banks were keen to earn 1 or 2 per cent on an asset that would otherwise earn nothing in their vaults. This year, when gold looked like a one-way market - heading down - mining companies and investment funds both sold heavily. When the price turned up, they needed to buy to cover earlier positions. However, the European banks also said last Sunday they would not increase the amount of gold on loan: as a result, loan rates soared to 10 per cent, and the gold price spiked up to $317. "This [derivatives] market evolved in a falling price environment," says Kevin Crisp of J.P Morgan. "We have not stress-tested how it works with a rising price." For participants, the most pressing question is how a market built on ample and cheap liquidity will adapt now that liquidity is drying up. For bystanders, the more interesting question is what happens to the gold price. Robert Guy of NM Rothschild, doyen of the London market, warned this week: "The market has turned, but don't think the debate about whether you should hold gold has gone away." It is an issue that has a long history. Early this century, the price of gold was fixed by the world's central banks and there were restrictions on private ownership. But in the 1960s and 1970s gold's monetary role diminished, private investors were allowed to buy it, and market forces started to determine its price. Pent-up private demand was one reason the price soared before 1980, despite substantial sales by both the International Monetary Fund and the US government. In many developing economies, notably India, the Gulf and Asia, gold has long been the investment of choice, and is often bought in the form of jewellery. Political and currency crises, soaring oil prices and high inflation also reinforced its investment attractions in the west. Those are yesterday's worries. Although gold has still many supporters, its falling price over nearly two decades has made it a remarkably poor long-term investment. Some investors still think of it as an inflation hedge, but there has been little sign of any inflation to hedge against. Treat it as a commodity, pure and simple, and the balance of supply and demand looks superficially encouraging. Demand, mainly for jewellery, substantially exceeds the amount of new gold dug from the ground each year. But the mines are only one source of supply. All the gold ever mined is still stored above ground. The best estimate is that there are nearly 140,000 tonnes of it: enough to meet nearly 40 years' demand. Nearly half is in jewellery, around a quarter is in central bank vaults, the rest in gold objects or private hoards. Every year, substantial quantities of gold scrap come on to the market, and most years the central banks have been net sellers. Last Sunday's statement may limit European bank sales - but they are still sales not purchases. The decision to restrict sales of central bank reserves has restored some of gold's lustre. But it may never shine as brightly as it once did. The Financial Times, October 2, 1999 Financial Scams The Cash "Shortage" at the IMF GAO kicks IMF butt. An independent US investigation has delivered a scathing report on the International Monetary Fund for understating its lending capacity and being poorly prepared for the millennium date change. The report, by the General Accounting Office, a draft copy of which has been obtained by the Financial Times, is likely to provoke further attacks on the Fund by critical US lawmakers. While the report may be altered before final publication, it casts light on last year's controversial agreement by the US Congress to back an IMF capital increase, which the Fund said was necessary because of a shortage of lending capacity. Many legislators questioned the IMF's calculations of its financing needs at the time, and congress commissioned the GAO to investigate. The report says the Fund is far too conservative in assessing how much it has available to lend to countries which face financial crisis. The IMF claims that, after its current lending commitments, it has about $77bn in liquid resources available for further loans to IMF members. But the GAO argues that the figure is probably higher, because the Fund discounts $19bn in a working balance reserve it says it needs. The GAO report notes that the reserve has not been drawn down in more than 20 years. The report is critical of the Fund's argument that it needs available resources of at least 30 per cent of its liquid liabilities (the so-called liquidity ratio). The GAO says that there is "no analytical basis" for the minimum ratio and that the IMF can supplement its resources by using $46bn in credit lines from member countries. On the Year 2000 issue, the report says the IMF has lagged in assessing some internal systems. "By completing the assessment so late in the year, IMF will not be fully aware of any problems until after the date change - too late to take pre-emptive action", the GAO says. It also says the IMF was "slow in recognising the potential impact" of dislocation on its member countries, a factor that might increase the financial demands on the Fund. An IMF spokesman said that the Fund believed it was "fully up to date" on the millennium question, and that it had announced a special facility for governments that face financing problems because of Y2K. He said many IMF members would be uncomfortable with a liquidity ratio that fell below 30 per cent for a sustained period and that the IMF's conservative financing approach was a policy of long standing. The next scheduled IMF quota review is due in 2002, but congress is expected to vote soon on whether to allow the Fund to revalue some of its gold reserves to take part in a debt relief initiative for the poorest countries. The Financial Times, October 2, 1999 ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, Omnia Bona Bonis, All My Relations. Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End Kris DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
