Roundtables | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Priorities for improving the chemical weapons treaty

Pal Aas — Fri, 16 May 2008 16:27:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

Some States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) are concerned about limiting the development and possible use of incapacitants for law enforcement. This was clear during the negotiations of the CWC. Other countries would like to have the right to produce any chemical, drug, or other agent for law enforcement purposes. Such agents could have several effects on humans, including altering brain function.

Consistent criticism from all sides proves that the NRC isn't a good regulator

David Lochbaum — Thu, 15 May 2008 09:23:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The future of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Andy Kadak raises a valid point about Davis-Besse's near miss resulting from a major breakdown not only at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) but also at the plant operator FirstEnergy and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO). INPO, formed by the industry in response to Three Mile Island, seeks to hold plant owners to standards considerably higher than NRC regulations. Any time a nuclear plant such as Davis-Besse falls below NRC regulations, it first falls below INPO standards.

Geoengineering could buy the time needed to develop a sustainable energy economy

Dan Whaley — Tue, 13 May 2008 10:26:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: Has the time come for geoengineering?

Although Alan Robock's "20 Reasons Why Geoengineering May Be a Bad Idea" raises legitimate questions, it seems to argue against implementation rather than against studying the underlying science. Few people are actively advocating for immediate, full-scale implementation of geoengineering techniques as a means of addressing climate change.

When states fail to address incapacitants

Ralf Trapp — Fri, 09 May 2008 14:42:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

Discussions of security risks will eventually have to take account of the readiness of governments to address them and agree on practical solutions. The Second Review Conference of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which included representatives from 114 national governments, has just completed its work--how did it deal with the issues identified in this roundtable?

Don't judge the nuclear industry or NRC by standards and incidents from 30 years ago

Anthony R. Pietrangelo — Thu, 08 May 2008 09:49:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The future of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is facing a significant challenge as it seeks to fulfill its responsibilities to ensure the safe and secure use of commercial nuclear technology. For the first time in decades, the NRC will soon conduct the licensing review of several new applications to build and operate nuclear power plants, as well as review the first ever application for a used fuel repository. In addition, it will continue its ongoing oversight of nuclear reactors, materials licensees, and used fuel management.

Climate engineering: Not a panacea, but necessary nonetheless?

Ken Caldeira — Tue, 06 May 2008 17:30:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: Has the time come for geoengineering?

Winston Churchill once famously said, "Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." Climate engineering may indeed be a bad idea, but so far, better ideas to mitigate global warming show little traction.

The NRC must see itself as a regulator first, not an industry booster

Victor Gilinsky — Thu, 01 May 2008 13:14:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The future of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

David Lochbaum wants to inject new blood into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff to stiffen enforcement of its safety rules. The composition of NRC technical staff is not the problem--they are a professional lot, as good as you will find in the federal government. Not surprisingly, though, they are responsive to priorities set at the top--by the commissioners, and mainly by the chairman.

Doing what is possible to limit incapacitants; what about truth serums?

Jonathan B. Tucker — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:20:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

Alan Pearson's latest comment criticizes my proposal to establish a new subcategory in the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) for declaring "other chemical production facilities" that manufacture peptides in quantities above a specified threshold because this approach would not cover all incapacitating agents, many of which are not peptides.

The core issues underlying the threat of incapacitants

Alan Pearson — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:56:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

On the issue of incapacitants, my colleagues and I are pretty much in agreement--States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) should establish clear boundaries between prohibited chemical weapons and toxic chemicals and delivery systems that are permitted for law enforcement purposes. Then they should develop mechanisms to ensure that states abide by their agreements.

New safety-focused rules, rather than strict compliance would make for a safer nuclear industry

Andrew C. Kadak — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:20:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The future of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

It's true that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has had lapses in enforcement of its rules by giving the benefit of the doubt to utilities. David Lochbaum provides reasonable examples of such lapses. Conversely, there have been commissions that have had such a focus on compliance that utilities were forced to follow rules that had minimal to no impact on safety, setting the entire focus on safety back 10 years, as the Millstone Unit 1 design basis reconstruction effort has shown.

Climate prediction works well for some variables and poorly for others

James Murphy — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:20:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The uncertainty in climate modeling

When deciding what type of information to give users, climate scientists need to be discerning. For example, in the forthcoming U.K. Climate Impacts Program (UKCIP08) scenarios that Lenny refers to (and in which I'm involved), we plan to supply information on changes in a number of climate variables, at a range of space and time scales, for different periods during the twenty-first century. But what level of information can be given?

Low per-capita emissions: A wealthy nation's goal, a poor nation's millstone

John Guillebaud — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:38:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: Population and climate change

It's true that in places where birthrates remain high, e.g. sub-Saharan Africa, per-capita emissions are quite low. Joseph Chamie and Betsy Hartmann see this as reason not to pursue a population policy to reduce emissions. We argue that full access to contraception in such regions can help with emissions reduction because per capita emissions must rise in order for people to be lifted out of poverty. The environmental impact of development can be reduced if there are fewer poor people needing to make the transition.

The need to quickly define law-enforcement agents

Pal Aas — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:19:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

I wonder why my colleagues in the United States seem to focus on the threat of terrorism when discussions of bioweapons surface? I suggest that we turn our attention to states with advanced industrial capabilities--the greatest concern when discussing the possible production, proliferation, and use of novel agents such as "the body's own bioweapons." Terrorists will likely continue to make use of more readily available options: explosives, toxic industrial chemicals, or classical chemical warfare agents.

We may not have the right tools to control the emerging threat

Ralf Trapp — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

The potential misuse of advances in the life sciences by terrorists cannot be ignored--there is evidence both of intent and rudimentary capability. But I agree with Pal Aas that these threats can be exaggerated. Even if terrorists could manage aspects of the development, testing, and production of a novel agent, weaponization remains a challenge. Therefore, opportunistic approaches, such as the diversion of toxic or infectious materials from available sources, are far more likely.

Don't undo the progress made in development and women's rights

Betsy Hartmann — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 08:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: Population and climate change

We all agree that climate change is a serious threat to environmental and human health. Precisely because of its seriousness, we don't have time to bark up the proverbial wrong tree. Population control isn't the solution to global warming. In much of the world, birthrates are coming down toward replacement level. In places where they remain relatively high, e.g. sub-Saharan Africa, per-capita emissions are quite low.

When the world is at stake, personal rights and sovereignty aren't perfectly clear

Joseph Chamie — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: Population and climate change

The increase in world population and greenhouse gas emissions is widely acknowledged to have serious implications for human well-being and all other life on Earth. But what can be done about it?

Any attempt to address this question must take two political realities into account: (1) The international community has adopted a "rights-based" approach to population and development issues; and (2) nations are sovereign to formulate and implement their own domestic policies, actions, and laws to address population, development, and greenhouse gas emissions.

The bioweapons threat is broader and closer than commonly thought

Jonathan B. Tucker — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

I don't disagree with most of my colleagues' points, particularly with respect to the debate over the use of incapacitating chemicals for law enforcement purposes. I differ slightly, however, with Pal Aas's contention that any bioterrorist threat associated with the misuse of bioregulators lies in the distant future.

Stabilize global population and tax carbon to reduce per-capita emissions

Frederick A. B. Meyerson — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: Population and climate change

Because this is the last round of our discussion, I'd like to make specific policy recommendations that address the related challenges of population growth and greenhouse gas emissions.

First, in a world where climate change will have significant adverse effects on resources and human welfare, we should do everything possible to quickly slow the current annual growth rate of more than 75 million people and stabilize global population.

Could incapacitating weapons become "everyday" weapons?

Alan Pearson — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

All of the participants in this roundtable have identified states and their interest in incapacitating chemical weapons as the primary cause of concern regarding bioregulators and their chemical analogs. This may seem strange to readers in the United States where discussions of biological and chemical weapons overwhelmingly focus on terrorism. But my colleagues are right. Not only are states expressing interest in the developments Jonathan Tucker describes, which they believe will provide the basis for "usable" (i.e. useful and politically acceptable) chemical

Producing new bioweapons isn't easy

Pal Aas — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:00:00 -0600

Roundtable Topic: The expanding range of biowarfare threats

"The Body's Own Bioweapons" is an informative and well-balanced presentation of the possible threats posed by mid-spectrum agents, such as bioactive molecules derived from the human body.

Security experts and members of the arms control community identify bioterrorism and the production of bioweapons on a small and large scale as one of the most challenging threats to national and international security. There are reasons to argue against such statements.