ENVIRONMENT-SOUTH AMERICA: Deadly Radioactive Cargo on the Horizon

By Marcela Valente Reprint | | Print |

Marcela Valente

BUENOS AIRES, Jan 5 2001 (IPS) - A British ship carrying nearly 77 tonnes of highly radioactive re-processed nuclear waste is approaching the Argentine seaboard on its way past Cape Horn, an area of strong winds, icebergs and treacherous currents.

The Pacific Swan, which weighed anchor in France on Dec 19 en route to Japan, is carrying a cargo seven times larger than that of the Pacific Pintail, which followed the same route via Cape Horn in 1995, triggering an outcry by governments and environmentalists in the region.

The vessel, owned by a unit of British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., is expected to pass by the mouth of the River Plate over the weekend, but far from the coast. Next week it should be sailing by the Malvinas/Falkland islands.

However, to cross from the Atlantic to Pacific oceans, the nuclear freighter will have to pass through Cape Horn, thus entering the exclusive economic zones of Argentina and Chile in an area notorious for its fierce winds, large number of icebergs and strong currents, which make navigation difficult.

In the case of nuclear transport ships, an accident would be lethal.

The Pacific Swan is the sixth vessel carrying radioactive material from Europe to Japan since the Pacific Pintail sailed via Cape Horn in 1995 – and was forced by a Chilean navy vessel to stay outside that country’s 200-mile maritime limit.

The Pacific Pintail sailed as close as 18 miles from Argentine territory and 50 miles from Chile.

The four latter trips took other routes. The Pacific Teal went via the Cape of Good Hope off of South Africa on a 1996-97 journey, while the Pacific Swan sailed through the Panama Canal in 1998 and on two occasions in 1999.

But after the Panama Canal was handed over to Panama by the United States, it became much more difficult to obtain permission to use that route for transporting nuclear waste, and British Nuclear Fuels decided to once again send its ships via Cape Horn.

The head of the international environmental watchdog Greenpeace’s energy campaign, Juan Carlos Villalonga, told IPS that he was surprised by the “low level of resistance” staged by Argentina.

The government of Fernando de la Rúa, after reacting together with Argentina’s neighbours Brazil, Uruguay and Chile to protest the Pacific Swan’s plans to sail near their coastlines and through Cape Horn, ended up simply ordering the navy to “escort” the ship, said Villalonga.

The activist was referring to a joint declaration issued by the four countries on Dec 21, two days after the boat departed and announced that it would take the route via Cape Horn.

In the communique, the governments of the four Southern Cone countries expressed their concern to Japan, Britain and France, the three nations involved in the operation.

The document underlined the right of coastal states to protect the environment in their exclusive economic zones, as stipulated by the United Nations Law of the Sea, and asked for assistance in enforcing “compliance with that responsibility.”

New Zealand also protested the route taken by the nuclear freighter, which will pass near the shoreline of that nation on its way to Japan, which it is scheduled to reach in February.

Greenpeace has been lobbying the governments involved in transporting the toxic waste, calling a protest outside the British Embassy in Buenos Aires on Dec 28.

The environmental watchdog criticised the “domineering” attitude taken by that European nation, which failed to address the demands set forth by the countries that would be in danger in case of an accident. Argentina and Chile are the countries that will be the most exposed, when the ship sails round Cape Horn, Villalonga pointed out.

However, while Chile, “in a mixture of warning and an expression of desire,” said the Pacific Swan would not be allowed to enter its exclusive economic zone, Argentina resigned itself to the situation, and finally offered to accompany the ship, he commented.

According to Villalonga, Argentina’s Foreign Ministry had taken a “permissive” stance, after its initial “positive” reaction alongside other countries in the region, by ordering that the boat be escorted instead of protesting the lack of prior notification on the route to be taken, or banning the ship from entering its maritime limit.

The activist stressed that supervision of the boat would not prevent an accident, nor would assistance in case of an emergency.

The communique issued by the four Southern Cone countries drew attention to the legal vacuum with respect to safety issues involved in the transportation of toxic material, especially regarding liability in case of accidents, including emergency plans.

The debate on such questions is being held up by the lack of collaboration by countries which have an interest in transporting toxic waste, said Villalonga. For example, Japan is not a party to the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage, he added.

But he pointed to European Union regulations requiring ships carrying nuclear waste to obtain the consent of en route nations.

In this case, however, the companies involved, expecting conflict, withheld the route the ship was to take until after it had set sail.

The Pacific Swan is carrying 192 blocks of highly radioactive vitrified nuclear waste – re-processed spent fuel mixed with glass – in eight containers back to Japan for temporary storage. The waste is a by-product of plutonium separation from Japanese irradiated nuclear fuel, which is re-processed by the French national nuclear power company COGEMA, on behalf of three electric power companies in Japan.

Greenpeace warns that there are 3,000 more blocks of nuclear waste and 45 tonnes of plutonium in Europe which are to be sent around Cape Horn in the future in case the route turns out to be one of relatively low conflict.

Japan is planning on developing a programme to use plutonium as fuel in nuclear power plants, which countries like Germany, the United States and France have abandoned due to the environmental risks involved.