Recently, I posted a
translation from France’s other
satirical/serious political journal Le Canard enchaîné (non, je ne
suis pas et ce n’est pas Charlie) regarding the
inconvenience of a geothermic energy source that was discovered under the
planned site of France’s underground nuclear waste storage facility. Several
citizens’ groups banded together to sue ANDRA, the government agency building the
facility, and they had their hearing on January 5, 2015.
Even if they get a favorable ruling in the
case, the court is powerless to order ANDRA to halt construction. The most that
can be hoped for is a condemnation and increased public awareness of this
serious flaw in the plans of the French state to deal with its nuclear waste
problem. In normal times, nuclear issues have a hard time getting onto the
radar of public discourse, and this tendency was only increased when the
horrific murders happened in Paris on January 7th, pushing all other news to
the margins. It is unfortunate that this recourse to the courts is the only way
to bring attention to what is really a public policy problem—a political issue
concerning a looming environmental catastrophe. One might think that the issue would
be taken as seriously as freedom of speech, or the importance of defending
values that one holds sacred. Fighting the despoiling of the land is an issue that could
unify everyone in a divided nation and a divided world, but instead we argue
about religion and the right to insult others.
What follows below is a statement about the
hearing prepared by the plaintiffs who brought the case to court.
The
French National Radioactive Waste Management Agency (ANDRA) kept lying in court:
Summary of the court hearing on January 5th, 2015
Following a lawsuit by six
concerned citizen groups (ASODEDRA,
BureStop55, Cedra52, Habitants Vigilants de Gondrecourt-le-Château, MIRABEL -
Lorraine Nature Environnement, Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire"), on
January the 5th, ANDRA was called to the Superior Court of Nanterre [near
Paris].
We sued ANDRA for the offense of hiding data on the
geothermal resource of the Bure site for more
than 15 years. This geothermal energy resource impedes
the construction of a
nuclear waste disposal site there,
as it might lead to drilling through the wastes. Our lawyer demonstrated that ANDRA willingly failed to execute its duty
to honestly inform the public. As a public agency, it is compelled to do so by law. Attorney Etienne Ambroselli said, “We
want to stop ANDRA from practicing the art of misinformation. We expect the court to condemn ANDRA for not telling the truth about
the difficulties it has
encountered in carrying out its mission to manage nuclear wastes over the long term.
The misinformation went on
during the legal
procedures before the hearing. ANDRA did not produce any new arguments;
the weaknesses of these had been emphasized in the citizen groups’ replications before the hearing.
Stuck in this awkward position, ANDRA now
has to modify its message with further misinformation.
While it had declared
there was no geothermal potential, it now recognizes there is. Henceforth, to elude the problem of safety, ANDRA now says it would be possible to tap
the geothermal brine near the site, but
this would not affect the safety
of the site. Henceforth, according to ANDRA's attorney, incidentally drilling
through the wastes would release only one
hundredth the amount of
natural radioactivity! It appears that there is nothing to worry about with
these high-level
long lived wastes, which raises an interesting
question: why bury them if they are so inconsequential?
As for the Safety Rules
[Règle Fondamentale de Sûreté, RFS III.2.f, then, Guide de Sûreté 2008 of the
French legislation] they would be meaningless...
When the memory of the
waste dump will have faded, people of the
future might wish to take advantage of the earth's thermal energy, and drilling operations might contact the wastes (this is quite possible considering
the decline of
fossil resources). The
future generations will be the
victims. It would be
irresponsible for our
leaders to give the go-ahead
to such a project.
Without new arguments, ANDRA's attorney could not justify the
malfeasance and unacceptable
malfunctions which happened during ANDRA’S
drilling in the
geothermal investigation. He only pretended that such problems (anomalous
obstruction of the tool by mud, inability to conduct sufficiently long
hydraulic testing, inappropriate
sampling and temperature recording...) would be the "usual"
problems encountered in such a task.
The judgment will be given
March the 27th at 14h. We hope the court will recognize the obvious strengths of the plea brought
forward by our concerned-citizens groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment