Oz signs away nuclear material to India

Australia’s agreement to provide India with uranium could leave Canberra with no say on the use of nuclear material shipped to India, the former head of Australia’s nuclear watchdog said Friday.

“[Australian authorities] clearly left out a number of things that the Indians don’t like . . . Where Australia has given reprocessing consent in the past, it’s on the basis that we approve downstream facilities where the plutonium will be used. But under the India agreement, we’re just not doing that,” John Carlson, the former head of the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office, was cited as saying by The Guardian.

Plutonium is created from uranium in nuclear reactors and may potentially be used in the creation of nuclear weapons.

According to Carlson, the “reprocessing consent” outlined in the sixth article of the bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement means Australia has no say in how India may choose to use byproducts from energy production.

The deal appeared to waive “standard provisions” relating to nuclear safeguards, Carlson told the newspaper, noting that Australia has been allowed to track the uranium it supplies, and well as its byproducts, under every similar agreement thus far.

An agreement on nuclear cooperation between India and Australia was signed on September 5 during Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s trip to New Delhi. Australia, which holds the largest uranium deposits in the world, has previously refused to sign such an agreement because India is not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

SA to sign on more nuclear bidders

South Africa said it plans to sign framework agreements with more countries before it decides on how to procure as many as 9,600 megawatts of nuclear energy.

Russia’s state-owned Rosatom Corp. and the Department of Energy announced a partnership on Sept. 22, saying they had reached an accord that laid the foundation for ordering as many as eight Russian VVER pressurized-water reactors. South Africa will sign a framework with France this month, and plans accords with China and Japan, Wolsey Barnard, acting director general at the department, told reporters today in Pretoria, the capital.

South Africa “will sign framework agreements with several countries with capability and compatibility of pressurized water reactors before making a decision on which country to use for the nuclear program,” the department said in a statement. The pact with Russia was the first, it said.

The National Treasury said in February 2013 that a 300 billion-rand ($27 billion) nuclear program was in the final stages of study. South Africa’s integrated resources plan envisions adding more nuclear energy to the grid to reduce reliance on coal and meet demand.

The type of technology used will determine the price of the build, while the country wants to be a part of all aspects of the program, said Zizamele Mbambo, the deputy director-general for nuclear in the department. “We want to be involved in the mining and the entire value chain.”

Before the country, which currently gets 5 percent of its power from nuclear, decides on the technology to employ and the procurement procedure, the government must first update its integrated resources plan, Mbambo said.

Areva SA (AREVA), Electricite de France SA, Toshiba Corp. (6502)’s Westinghouse Electric Corp., China Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding Corp. and Korea Electric Power Corp. have expressed interest in building the plants. South Africa also has a draft nuclear cooperation pact with China.

Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson said in the announcement last week that the agreement with Russia would allow the country to implement its plan to create more nuclear capacity by 2030.

Rosatom said Sept. 22 that the nuclear program would create thousands of jobs and result in local orders worth at least $10 billion.

“Vendors will make their various offers,” Mbambo said. “We’re looking closely into localization.”

Source: Bloomberg

Zille rips into nuclear deal

DA leader Helen Zille said on Monday the deal South Africa made with Russia for the supply of up to eight nuclear power plants means “someone is up to no good”.

Zille vented her anger in her weekly SA Today newsletter against President Jacob Zuma.

In a strongly-worded criticism of the president, she accused him of “plundering” the fiscus.

Zille ignored the rumours of fraud, corruption, racketeering and money laundering, stemming from various deals in which British darling and Boerehater Thabo Mebki and his followers are implicated.

Instead she blamed Zuma for all South Africa’s ills.

“The idea of up to a trillion rand changing hands on his say-so must be simply too good to pass over for a man with his track record. With his time at the helm running out, this Rosatom deal could be the ultimate windfall,” she said without blinking.

Britain has traditionally regarded South Africa as their piggy bank.

The co-operation agreement – to supply as many as eight nuclear plants generating up to 9.6GW of power – was announced last Monday.

South Africa’s energy department and Russia’s atomic energy agency Rosatom made the announcements.

Government has denied reports that Zuma interfered in the nuclear deal with Russia, or that he had instructed Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson to sign it.

“The department wishes to refute all allegations of ‘undue influence’ by the president towards concluding this agreement,” acting director general Wolsey Barnard said in a statement at the weekend.

He said such allegations were “baseless and at worst ludicrous, and they are purely concocted in order to tarnish the image and integrity of the president and the government of South Africa”.

Zille warned that should the deal go through, it would destroy the economy.

“How on earth does South Africa spend a trillion rand without wrecking our economy and propelling millions of people further into poverty?”

The National Development Plan and the Integrated Resource Plan have both cautioned against the expansion.

There was no way the South African economy could survive such a deal, Zille said.

“We need affordable solutions [to the country’s energy crisis] in the short to medium-term, not a trillion rand ‘legacy’ white elephant that our grandchildren will still be paying off.”

Finland, Turkey get Russian VVER1200 NPP

These latest design VVER1200 NPP’s have 60 year life span, with 20% reduction in build cost and time, and 10% reduction in operating cost. Turkey ordered 4 of these NPPs. Same process as SA: State deal subsequently approved by parliament. Russia to finance, built, own, operate and transfer option after 15 years. Russia buys back … Continue reading “Finland, Turkey get Russian VVER1200 NPP”

These latest design VVER1200 NPP’s have 60 year life span, with 20% reduction in build cost and time, and 10% reduction in operating cost.

Turkey ordered 4 of these NPPs. Same process as SA: State deal subsequently approved by parliament. Russia to finance, built, own, operate and transfer option after 15 years. Russia buys back spent fuel for processing.

In Finland one Russian VVER 1200 NPP will be build near Tornio – Outokumpu has 12% share in the planned NPP.

During 2014 Outokumpu said its investment in Fennovoima VVER1200 NPP, to be paid over the next decade, would be around 210 million euros, compared with its earlier estimate of around 150 to 200 million euros. (Nearly 3 billion Rand for the 12% share.)

The company’s stainless steel plants in Tornio, including 540 000t/y of FeCr-production, are the single largest consumer of electricity in Finland.

“We want to ensure a stable, predictable and low-carbon energy source at production cost to our operations in Finland,” Chief Executive Mika Seitovirta said in a statement on Wednesday. (19 February 2014)

Eight VVER1200 NPP’s are planned for South-Africa, near Jeffreys Bay, Gansbaai and Koeberg in Cape Town. Currently transmission losses from Mpumalanga to coastal cities in the Cape run at around 12%.

The real controversy surrounding the Russian-SA NPP agreement, refers to SA’s intention to again enrich uranium at Pelindaba near Pretoria for local NPP fuel production. South-Africa and Namibia, governed as a former province of South-Africa, have large uranium reserves. Uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel production, although legal under the NPT, can supply a country with a break-out capability to produce bombs.

NECSA was also to produce the TRISO fuel for Eskom’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor at Pelindaba.

During June 2014, the Indonesian government approached the South-African government for PBMR technology. After conducting a levelized evaluation of various NPP’s, Indonesia’s nuclear authority came to the conclusion that Eskom’s PBMR is the safest and lowest cost option for Indonesia.

The Eskom PBMR direct-cycle helium turbo-generator (from Mitsubishi) runs at 45% efficiency as compared to 34% of conventional NPPs. The Eskom PBMR was of 160MW capacity per module, and could also be build inland , for exmple in Middelburg, as unlike conventional NPPs, it does not require (sea) water cooling

During 2009 Eskom refused to become the anchor client for 60 of its own PBMR plants totaling 9 600MW. Thus during same year the construction of the first direct cycle (no water-steam circuit) PBMR in Cape Town by Murrey & Roberts and SNC Lavalin was halted. The R300m reactor pressure vessel had already been manufactured in Spain near the port of Santander. Currently this PBMR reactor vessel is lying at Saldanha Bay. The other major contracts with Mitsubishi and SGL Carbon were also cancelled.

During 2013 the then Minister of State-Owned-Enterprises and Eskom, Mr Melusi Gigaba was in Middelburg and answered a question about the possibility of the state reviving local technology and industry, in chosing PBMR instead of conventional NPP. The minister answered that only four PBMR engineers were still in state employment, and that their contracts were to expire during 2013. The minister then proceeded to announce that heads would roll if Medupi power station did not start-up end-2013.

Mr O’ Flaharty, then CFO of Eskom, is now CEO of Arcelor Mittal South-Africa. Mr Brian Dames left the employment of Eskom after a two decade career. Mr Gigaba, second on the ANC’s NEC-list and once mooted as South-Africa’s crown prince, is
now minister of Home Affairs.

During February 2014, the veteran financial reporter at Business Day, David Gleason passed away. Gleason predicted that Russia would win the South-African nuclear build contract, and that as a result prized Russian assets in South-Africa would then experience a change in ownership.

Norilsk Nickel has put up for sale its 50% share in the rich and highly profitable Nkomati Nickel mine not far from Middelburg, Mpumalanga. First option to refuse belongs to South-African ARM. It remains to be seen who will soon own this valuable asset.

Zuma signed Russian nuclear deal

President Jacob Zuma personally negotiated with Russian President Vladimir Putin to have Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation build nuclear power stations worth R1-trillion in South Africa, the Mail and Guardian reported.

According to the report, President Zuma had started the process directly with Putin at July’s Brics summit in Brazil and then finalised the details of the nuclear pact during his surprise trip to Moscow last month.

The Mail and Guardian quoted a senior ANC leader and a well-placed ANC MP as its sources.

The ANC members said that President Zuma had instructed Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson to sign the deal with the Russians at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) conference in Vienna.

The president told his trusted ministers and MPs of the deal.

The nuclear R1-trillion deal was announced on Monday by both Rosatom and the department of energy. The department though has since said the the deal had not yet been finalised.

Minister Joemat-Pettersson has been summoned to appear before Parliament’s energy portfolio committee.

The Democratic Alliance has called for the details of the deal to be made public in order to try and exploit it politically.

Nuclear trumps shale and gas

The signing in Vienna – at the margins of the 58th session of the International Atomic Energy Agency General Conference – of a strategic nuclear partnership between Russia and South Africa, has met with criticism from the mining sector.

The agreement lays the foundation for a large-scale nuclear power plant procurement and development programme of South Africa based on the construction of new nuclear power plants with Russian VVER reactors with a total installed capacity of up to 9,6 GW or 8 units.

These will be the first based on the Russian technology to be built on the African continent.

The signed agreement provides for comprehensive collaboration in other areas of nuclear power, including the construction of a Russian-technology based multipurpose research reactor, assistance in the development of South African nuclear infrastructure, and education of South African nuclear specialists.

The creation of new highly-skilled workplaces will also allow South African companies to further participate in Rosatom’s projects in third countries.

South Africa’s industry will become dependent on sources other than shale and coal, critics say. While industry and certain role players obsess about shale and gas, Mozambique’s gas resources will also need expensive infrastructure.

The questionable benefits that shale gas might offer, will be short-lived, unlike nuclear.

This agreement would naturally limit South Africa’s importation of energy from Namibia or Mozambique.

Also, this will probably mean an end to preferential electricity contracts that offer power at a rate far below the level other industrial users pay, to companies like BHP Billiton.

The R9,5bn lost in embedded derivatives, as reported by Eskom, is the cost of the remaining time on these preferential electricity contracts, some of which still have years to run.

Other energy sources will be hydroelectric power from the future Inga III dam in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

South Africa’s nuclear power ambitions had attracted several proposals.

French group Areva, which built South Africa’s only nuclear plant at Koeberg, had proposed to provide the country with its new generation of EPR reactors.

Government had also solicited an offer from the US-Japanese group Westinghouse.

SA and Russia sign nuclear agreement

Russia and South Africa have signed an intergovernmental agreement on strategic partnership in nuclear energy sector opening the possibility of construction of nuclear reactors in the country using Russian technologies, state nuclear corporation Rosatom said Monday.

“The agreement creates a basis for the development of South Africa’s program on construction of nuclear power plants equipped with Russian VVER-type reactors with total generating capacity of up to 9.6 GWt (up to eight units),” a Rosatom spokesman told RIA Novosti.

“Those would be the first nuclear power plants on the African continent using Russian technology,” the official said.

South Africa currently has two nuclear reactors generating 5 percent of its electricity.

Russia will supply eight nuclear power units to South Africa until 2023 under the agreement signed in Vienna on Monday.

These will be the first nuclear power plants using Russian technology in Africa, with a combined capacity of 9.6 gigawatts.

“Rosatom is ready to assist South Africa in creating a world-class industrial cluster from the initial stage of the nuclear fuel cycle to engineering and production of equipment,” Rosatom Head Sergei Kiriyenko said at the signing ceremony held on the sidelines of the 58th session of the U.N. General Assembly of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

He said this would allow Russia and South Africa to carry out joint projects in third countries in the future. The project will also create thousands of new jobs and generate local contracts worth up to $10 billion.

Kiriyenko earlier evaluated the project at$40 billion to $50 billion.

Russia is also ready to provide a low-interest loan for the project.

Experts say that it will allow South Africa to build its own nuclear power industry, achieve 40%-60% localisation, create about 30,000 new jobs and bring in $16 billion in investment as well as $5 billion worth of budget revenue.

The South African government has determined three sites for building new nuclear power plants.

Source: RIA Novosti/ItarTASS

Iran’s leader suddenly takes ill

Though Iran has been broadcasting pictures and videos of top state officials and noted foreign dignitaries visiting Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the hospital, the health of the man who has held the most powerful post in the Islamic Republic remains unclear.

The unusual public relations management of what has been described as a prostate surgery suggests Tehran may be preparing the nation and the world for a transition to a third supreme leader. Iranian efforts to project an atmosphere of normalcy conceal concerns among players in the Iranian political system that a power vacuum will emerge just as the Islamic republic has reached a geopolitical crossroads.

Any transition comes at the most crucial time in the 35-year history of the Islamic Republic due to unprecedented domestic political shifts underway and, more importantly, due to international events.

Pragmatic conservative President Hassan Rouhani’s election in June 2013 elections led to a social, political and economic reform program facing considerable resistance from within the hard-right factions within the clerical and security establishments. The biggest issue between the presidential camp and its opponents is the ongoing process of negotiations with the United States over the Iranian nuclear program.

Source: Stratfor

Iran could join NPT, Seoul urges North to abandon nuclear for investment

The Russian Foreign Ministry said Thursday that Iran could possibly become a full member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

“The agreements reached on November 24, 2013, in Geneva on Iran’s nuclear program opens the actual perspective that by November of this year an exit [from the issue] and a long-term and reliable settlement of this issue will be found. Regardless of the difficult approach during the negotiation process, there is a possibility that Iran [could receive] its full capacity of rights as an NPT member state, including the right to enrich uranium and canceling the sanction regime [against the country],” the ministry said on its website.

“We hope that all the parties taking part in the consultations will show the political will in order to proceed with the final, mutually acceptable agreements, which will enable to re-establish trust of the international society for the peaceful nature of the Nuclear program of Iran. This could have a positive impact on the situation in the Middle East and lead to a creation of a zone, free of mass destruction weapons,” the statement said.

The fifth round of talks on Iran’s nuclear program was held in Vienna in July.

Meanwhile South Korea is ready to help its northern neighbor attract international investment, if it gives up its nuclear ambitions, South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency reported Thursday citing the country’s finance minister, Choi Kyung-hwan.

“If North Korea decides to abandon its nuclear weapons, we will cooperate with Northeast Asian countries to actively support North Korea’s accession to international financial organizations and its attraction of international investment,” the agency reported Choi as saying during a speech at a forum on Asian economic cooperation.

The official also promised to facilitate the establishment of a development bank for Northeast Asian countries, which would help North Korea build infrastructure to help its poor citizens.

Swiss share Russian concern over nuclear in Ukraine

Swiss President and Chairperson-in-Office of the OSCE Didier Burkhalter shared Russia’s concern over nuclear security due to US intention to supply nuclear fuel to Ukraine and urged Moscow to address the International Atomic Energy Agency.

“We share your opinion regarding the nuclear security problem. Nuclear security represents a key problem for the Swiss nuclear policy,” Burkhalter wrote in a letter to Vladimir Gutenev, first deputy chairman of Russia’s State Duma committee on industry.

In June, Gutenev sent Burkhalter a letter, warning him about the potential threat to the security of European countries in the case of man-made disasters at Ukraine’s nuclear power plants in light of the intention of the current Kiev authorities to sign an agreement on fuel supply from the United States.

The IAEA plans a diplomatic conference at the beginning of next year. The Swiss president reminded that his country had proposed to introduce changes to The Convention on Nuclear Safety and said he would welcome Russia’s help in the preparation of the conference of the IAEA, the keeper of the Convention.

He said, however, the specific issue of US supplies to Ukraine needed to be addressed by the Ukraine’s national security first.

Burkhalter added that the nuclear security was out of the authority of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, but could be reviewed by the IAEA board.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Wednesday that Moscow must be informed of every attempt by Ukraine to use Western nuclear fuel in Soviet- and Russian-made reactors, referring to US company Westinghouse seeking to seize more contracts in Europe, including Ukraine.

SA expanding nuclear

The department of energy will be devoting almost R1-billion to cementing South Africa’s nuclear energy expansion ambitions.

In her budget vote speech on Monday, Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson said that R850-million had been allocated to the department and its relevant agencies to undertake further research and development into nuclear energy, especially in regard to nuclear safety matters.

“Regulations for the handling of hazardous materials, in terms of international obligations, and the development of nuclear policies and legislation to ensure the peaceful use of nuclear energy will also be pursued,” she said.

How South Africa will finance the expansion of nuclear energy, beyond its single atomic power station Koeberg remains key. The procurement of 9 600MW of nuclear power is expected to cost between R400-billion and R1-trillion.

The state in the meantime has worries of its own, including a large budget deficit and rising government debt levels.

The minister did not reveal the final details of the new Cabinet subcommittee on energy security, which will be integral to plotting the course of nuclear in the country’s energy mix. It will replace the erstwhile Cabinet body responsible for nuclear procurement – the national nuclear energy executive coordinating committee. But she said the “process is being refined and Cabinet will pronounce on this matter shortly”.

Alongside nuclear plans, the department will be turning a renewed eye on the opportunities for gas, including shale gas, in the country’s energy mix.

The lack of infrastructure, including pipelines and storage facilitates had made it difficult for gas to feature as a major energy carrier in South Africa, said Joemat-Pettersson. This was despite the discoveries of extensive reserves in the region, including in neighbouring Mozambique, and off South Africa’s west coast.

The much-anticipated gas utilisation master plan would outline the infrastructure necessary “to open up the gas market for the residential, commercial and industrial sectors”. A draft of the plan was being finalised and would be taken through the Cabinet before being opened for stakeholder consultation, Joemat-Pettersson said.

The plan’s scope includes “investigating the development of a gas- receiving and storage terminal for liquefied natural gas, and to meet the gas to liquids requirements at the Mossel Bay refinery, as well as investigating the conversion of Eskom’s diesel plants,” she said.

This year, the department would also continue to refine the Independent Systems and Market Operators Bill. The Bill, which foundered in the legislature last year, is key to overhauling the electricity sector and improving the access of independent power producers.

Source: M&G

US will assume control of Japan’s nuclear cache

Fukushima
Fukushima

According to The New York Times, Japan will announce on Monday that it will turn over to Washington more than 700 pounds of weapons-grade plutonium and a large quantity of highly enriched uranium, a decades-old research stockpile that is large enough to build dozens of nuclear weapons.

The nuclear fuel being turned over to the United States, which is of American and British origin, is a fraction of Japan’s overall stockpile. Japan has more than nine tons of plutonium stored in various locations and it is scheduled to open in the fall a new nuclear fuel plant that could produce many tons more every year.

American officials have been quietly pressing Japan to abandon the program, arguing that the material is insufficiently protected even though much of it is in a form that would be significantly more difficult to use in a weapon than the supplies being sent to the United States.

The explosions at Fukushima were chemical hydrogen explosions and were not nuclear explosions however. The exposed core reacts with the high pressure steam at about 2000°C to form zirconium and hydrogen. What we DO have is effectively three dirty bombs, ejecting radioactive isotopes in the form of dust particles into the atmosphere.

It takes a dosage of 4 Sieverts to kill 50% of the population, one Sievert would kill 5% of the population. Background level is 1-2 mS/y, smokers inhale an additional 5-10mS/y. 30 milliSieverts/year is regarded as the maximum occupational danger level (airline pilots, etc get about 5-9 mS/y). Some areas in Japan may get that level, Europe almost certainly will not.

Using Bequerels instead of Sieverts: Background level here for foodstuffs is about 40 Bequerels/kilogramm, warning levels for foods after Chernobyl were set at 800 B/Kg. Cancer patients sometimes have a scintigramm at 4 MEGA-Bequerels = 47 THOUSAND Bequerels/kilogramm without any negative effects.

Most of the fallout cloud should go out over the Pacific where it will be washed out of the sky by rain. Each component of the fallout has a different duration depending on which isotope it is. Each isotope has a so-called half-life. This means that half its radiation is gone after this half-life. Since 210 =1,000 and 220 = 1,000,000 it takes 10 respectively 20 half-lives for that isotope’s radiation to fall to 1 thousandth resp. one millionth of its initial value.

The dangerous elements which accumulate in the body are iodine, cesium and plutonium. The reactor Fukushima #3 is a MOX reactor.

Iodine 131 has a half-life of 8 days. It is a β and γ emitter. Iodine congregates in the thyroid gland. You can take non-radioactive I127 pills to saturate your thyroid preemptively, so that it doesn’t take up any I131.

Cesium137 has a half-life of about 33 years, β and γ emitter. The body treats cesium like potassium, so it is eventually excreted. but can cause many different types of cancer, particularly in the excretion filters, liver and kidneys.

Plutonium239 has a half-life of about 24,000 years, so it doesn’t go away. It is an α and γ emitter which congregates in the bone marrow where the α particles can do serious damage quickly.

Don’t eat any Kobe beef, imported Sushi or Pacific fish unless it has been officially checked for radiation first.

Source: VoR

Russia to conduct anti-nuclear observer flight over Spain

antonov30BA group of Russian inspectors will fly an observation mission over Spain within the framework of the Treaty on Open Skies, the head of the National Nuclear Threat Reduction Center, Sergei Ryzhkov, told Tass on Saturday. The flight will be made on an Antonov-30B observation aircraft, he said.

“The observation flight will be made between March 16 and 22 from ‘Open Skies’ Getafe Airfield with a maximum range of up to 1,800 kilometers,” he added. Observation flights are made to promote bigger openness and transparency in the military activity of the states participants in the treaty, as well as to strengthen security through confidence building.

According to Ryzhkov, the Russian plane will make its flight on the itinerary coordinated with Spain, while Spanish specialists on board will control the use of the observation equipment and compliance with treaty provisions.

“This is the fourth observation flight of Russian inspectors over countries signatories to the treaty in 2014,” he noted. The Open Skies Treaty was signed in 1992, and brings together 34 countries. Observation flights are made over Russia, the United States, Canada and European countries. The main aims of the Open Skies are growth of transparency, control over the implementation of agreements on arms control, broader possibilities of crisis prevention and settlement of crisis situations within the framework of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and other international organizations.

Source: Voice of Russia

Misread telexes on Iran’s nuclear led to fundamental error

iaeaWhen Western intelligence agencies began in the early 1990s to intercept telexes from an Iranian university to foreign high technology firms, intelligence analysts believed they saw the first signs of military involvement in Iran’s nuclear programme. That suspicion led to U.S. intelligence assessments over the next decade that Iran was secretly pursuing nuclear weapons.

The supposed evidence of military efforts to procure uranium enrichment equipment shown in the telexes was also the main premise of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s investigation of Iran’s nuclear programme from 2003 through 2007.

But the interpretation of the intercepted telexes on which later assessments were based turned out to have been a fundamental error. The analysts, eager to find evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons programme, had wrongly assumed that the combination of interest in technologies that could be used in a nuclear programme and the apparent role of a military-related institution meant that the military was behind the procurement requests.

The intercepted telexes that set in train the series of U.S. intelligence assessments that Iran was working on nuclear weapons were sent from Sharif University of Technology in Tehran. Credit: public domain
The intercepted telexes that set in train the series of U.S. intelligence assessments that Iran was working on nuclear weapons were sent from Sharif University of Technology in Tehran. Credit: public domain
In 2007-08, Iran provided hard evidence that the technologies had actually been sought by university teachers and researchers.

The intercepted telexes that set in train the series of U.S. intelligence assessments that Iran was working on nuclear weapons were sent from Sharif University of Technology in Tehran beginning in late 1990 and continued through 1992. The dates of the telexes, their specific procurement requests and the telex number of PHRC were all revealed in a February 2012 paper by David Albright, the executive director of the Institute for Science and International Security, and two co-authors.

The telexes that interested intelligence agencies following them all pertained to dual-use technologies, meaning that they were consistent with work on uranium conversion and enrichment but could also be used for non-nuclear applications.

But what raised acute suspicions on the part of intelligence analysts was the fact that those procurement requests bore the telex number of the Physics Research Center (PHRC), which was known to have contracts with the Iranian military.

U.S., British, German and Israeli foreign intelligence agencies were sharing raw intelligence on Iranian efforts to procure technology for its nuclear programme, according to published sources.
The telexes included requests for “high-vacuum” equipment, “ring” magnets, a balancing machine and cylinders of fluorine gas, all of which were viewed as useful for a programme of uranium conversion and enrichment.

The Schenck balancing machine ordered in late 1990 or early 1991 provoked interest among proliferation analysts, because it could be used to balance the rotor assembly parts on the P1 centrifuge for uranium enrichment. The “ring” magnets sought by the university were believed to be appropriate for centrifuge production.

The request for 45 cylinders of fluorine gas was considered suspicious, because fluorine is combined with uranium to produce uranium hexafluoride, the form of uranium that used for enrichment.

The first indirect allusion to evidence from the telexes in the news came in late 1992, when an official of the George H. W. Bush administration told The Washington Post that the administration had pushed for a complete cutoff of all nuclear-related technology to Iran, because of what was called “a suspicious procurement pattern”.[related_articles]

Then the Iranian efforts to obtain those specific technologies from major foreign suppliers were reported, without mentioning the intercepted telexes, in a Public Broadcasting System “Frontline” documentary called “Iran and the Bomb” broadcast in April 1993, which portrayed them as clear indications of an Iranian nuclear weapons programme.

The producer of the documentary, Herbert Krosney, described the Iranian procurement efforts in similar terms in his book “Deadly Business” published the same year.

In 1996, President Bill Clinton’s CIA Director John Deutch declared, “A wide variety of data indicate that Tehran has assigned civilian and military organisations to support the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.”

For the next decade, the CIA’s non-proliferation specialists continued to rely on their analysis of the telexes to buttress their assessment that Iran was developing nuclear weapons. The top-secret 2001 National Intelligence Estimate bore the title “Iran Nuclear Weapons Program: Multifaceted and Poised to Succeed, but When?”

Former IAEA Deputy Director General for Safeguards Olli Heinonen recalled in a May 2012 article that the IAEA had obtained a “set of procurement information about the PHRC” – an obvious reference to the collection of telexes – which led him to launch an investigation in 2004 of what the IAEA later called the “Procurement activities by the former Head of PHRC”.

But after an August 2007 agreement between Iran and IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei on a timetable for the resolution of “all remaining issues”, Iran provided full information on all the procurement issues the IAEA had raised.

That information revealed that the former PHRC head, Sayyed Abbas Shahmoradi-Zavareh, who had been a professor at Sharif University at the time, had been asked by several faculty departments to help procure equipment or material for teaching and research.

Iran produced voluminous evidence to support its explanation for each of the procurement efforts the IAEA had questioned. It showed that the high vacuum equipment had been requested by the Physics Department for student experiments in evaporation and vacuum techniques for producing thin coatings by providing instruction manuals on the experiments, internal communications and even the shipping documents on the procurement.

The Physics Department had also requested the magnets for students to carry out “Lenz-Faraday experiments”, according to the evidence provided, including the instruction manuals, the original requests for funding and the invoice for cash sales from the supplier. The balancing machine was for the Mechanical Engineering Department, as was supported by similar documentation turned over to the IAEA. IAEA inspectors had also found that the machine was indeed located at the department.

The 45 cylinders of fluorine that Shahmoradi-Zavareh had tried to procure had been requested by the Office of Industrial Relations for research on the chemical stability of polymeric vessels, as shown by the original request letter and communications between the former PHRC head and the president of the university.

The IAEA report on February 2008 recorded the detailed documentation provided by Iran on each of the issues, none of which was challenged by the IAEA. The report declared the issue “no longer outstanding at this stage”, despite U.S. pressure on ElBaradei to avoid closing that or any other issue in the work programme, as reported in diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks.

The IAEA report showed that the primary intelligence basis for the U.S. charge of an Iranian nuclear weapons programme for more than a decade had been erroneous.

That dramatic development in the Iran nuclear story went unnoticed in news media reporting on the IAEA report, however. By then the U.S. government, the IAEA and the news media had raised other evidence that was more dramatic – a set of documents supposedly purloined from an Iran laptop computer associated with an alleged covert Iranian nuclear weapons programme from 2001 to 2003. And the November 2007 NIE had concluded that Iran had been running such a programme but had halted it in 2003.

Despite the clear acceptance of the Iranian explanation by the IAEA, David Albright of ISIS has continued to argue that the telexes support suspicions that Iran’s Defence Ministry was involved in the nuclear programme.

In his February 2012 paper, Albright discusses the procurement requests documented in the telexes as though the IAEA investigation had been left without any resolution. Albright makes no reference to the detailed documentation provided by Iran in each case or to the IAEA’s determination that the issue was “no longer outstanding”.

Ten days later, the Washington Post published a news article reflecting Albright’s claim that the telexes proved that the PHRC had been guiding Iran’s secret uranium enrichment programme during the 1990s. The writer was evidently unaware that the February 2008 IAEA report had provided convincing evidence that the intelligence analyst’s interpretations had been fundamentally wrong.

Source: IPS

Gareth Porter, an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy, received the UK-based Gellhorn Prize for journalism for 2011 for articles on the U.S. war in Afghanistan. His new book “Manufactured Crisis: the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare”, will be published in February 2014.