(496.4906) Pacific News Bulletin - The study of the International Atomic Energy Agency was commissioned in August 1995, and paid for by the French government. An international team of scientists spent two years investigation the current radiological impact of 193 atmospheric and underground nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls in French Polynesia.
The executive summary was released weeks before the IAEA's full technical report, and a team visited Fiji and Tahiti in early June to report the findings to Pacific governments. The summary contained a rage of quotes arguing that radioactive pollution on Moruroa and Fangataufa has "no radiological significance", and some newspaper headlines suggested Moruroa is safe, or that French nuclear testing left no legacies for the people of the South Pacific.
Presence of radioactivity
For thirty years, French government officials stated that there was no radioactive fallout from French nuclear tests, or leakage of radioactivity into the lagoons at Moruroa and Fangataufa (it was a ritual for visiting politicians and generals to take a dip in the lagoon to show its safety). The IAEA report shows, however, that there is radioactive pollution caused by the nuclear tests, in spite of decades of denials;
- five kilograms of plutonium remain in the sediments of Moruroa's lagoon as a result of atmospheric nuclear tests and plutonium safety trials, with a further three kilos in fangataufa's lagoon;
- the concentration of tritium in the lagoon is then times higher than in the open ocean, as a result of leakage from cavities created by the under ground tests; particles of plutonium and americium remain at the trial sites on Colette, Ariel and Vesta islands, on the north side of Moruroa atoll;
- high levels of cesium 137 were found over small areas totaling several hectares on the Kilo-Empereur rim of Fangataufa atoll.
Conclusions don't match data
While acknowledging the presence of these radioactive materials, the IAEA report goes on to argue that this radioactive pollution has "little" or "no radiological significance". It argues that this radioactive contamination will not damage human health or the natural environment in the future. Moreover, the report concludes that "no remedial action at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls is needed", and "no further environmental monitoring at Moruroa and Fangataufa is needed" for purposes of radiological study.
But why should the test sites be left unmonitored? The IAEA study did not involve a detailed geological study of the atolls's fragile basalt base. The recommendation that there should be no monitoring suggests there will be no further leaching of radioactivity from past underground tests into the marine environment. But the small amounts of tritium in the lagoons suggests that there are pathways for radioactivity to enter the ocean, contrary to French assurances that no radioactivity would reach the ocean.
Several underground tests breached the permeable outer layer of the atoll, which raises further concern over containment of nuclear material, supposedly sealed in the rock by the hear to the explosions. Ongoing monitoring is crucial, especially if French Polynesia gains its independence from France and the issue of compensation and clean-up becomes an issue of dispute in future relations.
Moruroa and beyond
The IAEA study focuses on the current and future radiological situation at Moruroa and Fangataufa. Its terms of reference did not include the radiological impact from atmospheric testing between 1966 and 1974 on workers at the test sites or people on neighbouring islands. The study does include brief notes, however, on atmospheric fallout on the inhabited Gambier islands.
(from tests on July 2, 1966 and August 8, 1971), Tureia (July 2, 1967 and June 12, 1971) and Tahiti (July 17, 1974).
In February, the French magazine Nouvel Observateur analyzed French Army documents released thirty years after the first tests in 1966. They documented that four inhabited neighbouring islands -Tureia, Reao, Pukarua and Mangareva- were contaminated by fallout from atmospheric tests in the 1960s, but the Maori people were not warned or evacuated. (Soon after the publication of the article, the military archives were closed to other reporters on the orders of the French Defence Minister) (See WISE NC 487.4839: French Nuclear Tests: Thirty years of lies).
Earlier this year in the French Parliament, the French Defence Minister admitted for the first time that Tahiti and other islands had received radioactive fallout from the 1960s atmospheric tests, in spite of decades of denials. The legacies of French nuclear testing go far beyond the current situation at the test sites.
Independence of the IAEA
The IAEA study is an important step, given France's previous refusal to allow foreign scientists to conduct comprehensive, long-term, multidisciplinary studies on the atolls. But the IAEA is hardly a neutral body -its mandate involves the promotion of nuclear power, and the study reflects a cautious approach to what constitutes a radiological hazard (recent studies show that small doses of radiation over long periods can be the most harmful to human health). Many people in Tahiti are sceptical.
The IAEA study does not look in detail at cancer rates in French Polynesia, or the health of the 12,000 Polynesians who worked at the test sites between 1966 and 1996. Yet this is a central issue when evaluating the effects of thirty years of nuclear testing. Experience from British and US testing in the 1940s and 1950s show that long-term health impacts are shown for military and civilian personnel who worked at the test sites, and these nuclear veterans will continue to seek compensation.
The French government health agency INSERM has prepared a report on cancer rates in French Polynesia, but its release has been delayed due to ongoing efforts to obtain documents from the French military. Former tests site workers are calling for open access to their own medical files, which they are currently denied. Further transparency is required.
The IAEA study is an important fist step in documenting and analysing the effects of thirty years of French testing. But it is just that - a first step. France has ongoing responsibilities, to address questions of compensation and clean-up at Moruroa and Fangataufa, and the health of test site workers, French military personnel and other South Pacific peoples affected by the tests.
The May 1998 IAEA report is called: "Situation radiologique sur les atolls de Mururoa et de Fangataufa: rapport succinct d'un Comité Consultatif international" -"Radiological situation on the atolls of Moruroa and of Fangataufa: a brief report of a consultative international Committee".
Source: Pacific News Buletin, July 1998
Contact: Pacific Concerns Resource Centre: 83 Amy Street, Toorak, Private Mail Bag,Suva, Fiji.
Tel: +679-304 649; Fax: +679-304 755
Email: pcrc@is.com.fj
Are the atolls safe?
- Five kilograms of plutonium remain in the sediments of Moruroa's lagoon;
- The concentration of tritium in the lagoon is ten times higher than in the open ocean, as a result of leakage from cavities created by the underground tests;
- Particles of plutonium and americium remain at the trial sites on Colette, Ariel and Vesta islands on the north side of Moruroa atoll;
- High levels of cesium 137 were found over small areas totaling several hectares on Fangataufa atoll;
- There are an estimated 500 kilograms of plutonium sealed in cavities under the atolls along with other fission products;
- at least two shafts drilled for underground tests were also used as plutonium waste depositories;
- The small amounts of tritium in the lagoon suggest there are pathways for radioactivity to leach into the ocean;
- There is no detailed geological study of the atolls' fragile basalt base
- No remedial action is needed
- No ongoing environmental monitoring is needed
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |