Pit production heating up; Jan 29 mtg in Santa Fe

If you have been forwarded this message and want to receive these local letters directly, write. Or if you want to be removed from this closed New Mexico list, let us know by return email.
Previous local letters, wider bulletins, home page
Facebook: Los Alamos Study Group; Twitter: @TrishABQ; Blog: Forget the Rest
To subscribe to the Study Group's main listserve send a blank email here. To unsubscribe send a blank email here.
Key resources on nuclear weapons ban treaty negotiations, plutonium and pit production in Los Alamos, internships
Contribute if you can and haven't yet! (We now use PayPal.) Thank you! Fundraising appeal with hyperlinks.
Contact us.

January 15, 2018

Dear friends --

As discussed in Bulletin 242 our New Mexico Democratic senators (and Rep. Ben Ray Lujan) are working hard in concert with right-wing ideologues and nuclear weapons contractors to support a return to industrial-scale production of atomic bomb cores (plutonium "pits"), and to make sure this huge investment (with its nuclear waste generation and its risk to workers and the environment) happens at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).

We need your help to change their minds -- and not just on this but on some other key issues as well. They are failing us. 

I (Greg) just returned from Washington, DC, where discussions about where and how much plutonium manufacturing, and when to do it, are underway. Some in Congress and the Trump Administration are asking whether industrial plutonium processing and manufacturing can be, or if so should be, done at LANL. It is not a new question -- see this 2016 amendment, with its 126 ayes.

Trump's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) now says some, but perhaps NOT large-scale, pit production should be done at LANL. NNSA's own internal review office apparently says differently, according to New Mexico Dems.

Some are asking (2017 video) whether pit production should be done at all right now. They (and we with them) are in the minority. So far. The Trump administration has just pulled the plug on the only new warhead that requires pits (here's the Nuclear Posture Review which says that, in a searchable pdf).

Our regional response is critically important now. We would like to invite our members, supporters, and friends to a short briefing and Q&A period, and then action planning at The Commons, 2300 W Alameda St (map) in Santa Fe, on Monday, Jan 29th, from 5:30-8:30 pm. We will provide a simple buffet dinner (call if you want to help with that). Please come -- this is the time and place to come together and plan "next steps." There are many tasks begging for help right now -- a lot of "low-hanging fruit" to pluck. It is much easier to do this now than it would be later, once the die is cast. "Later" may be too late.

We would like to discuss these matters with our Taos friends but we do not know when would be most convenient for you.

We have updated our on-line record of New Mexico Local Government Resolutions & Letters addressing nuclear weapons issues at LANL. It is an impressive catalog of official local government caution and negativity. It may not be comprehensive for earlier dates but we think it does capture all the recent resolutions. These were supplied to key executive branch and congressional decisionmakers this past Saturday along with other materials as part of our follow-up from DC meetings and earlier letters. 

A sad contrast with this (still-evolving!) New Mexico record can be seen in last week's unanimous passage of a resolution supporting pit production by the Aiken, SC City Council ("Aiken City Council supports prospective nuclear weapons mission at SRS," Colin Demarest, Aiken Standard). The flavor of local boosterism can be seen in this video of the meeting (at 1:16 to 1:29). One day later, the Aiken County Council passed a similar resolution, also unanimously.

Last Friday (1/12/18), the Albuquerque Journal North ran an editorial, "Debate over ‘pits’ at LANL may be getting real." Yes, it is. That day, a congressman and his staff visited LANL to investigate its fitness for this mission; we provided an hour-long pre-trip briefing in DC.

***************************************************

There are other pressing subjects we must discuss with at least some of you. One follows.

Cato the Elder (234–149 BC) apparently concluded most or all of the speeches he gave in the Roman Senate with some variation of the injunction, "Carthage must be destroyed" ("Carthago delenda est"), no matter the subject.

With this in mind we might rightly say -- all the time, in every political context -- "Global warming and the resulting mass extinctions must be stopped, at all costs."

Including that dangerous clause, "at all costs," is realistic because unchecked global warming and the resulting mass extinctions are, in themselves, greater than any other costs which could ever be imagined. If global warming proceeds unchecked, and positive feedbacks kick in heavily, there will be no one left to "imagine" anything.

A year ago we said issues must be triaged. And so they must.

Global warming phenomena are outstripping the slow-to-evolve models of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Please see for example David Spratt's new piece, "What we learned about the climate system in 2017 that should send shivers down the spines of policy makers." We need to be "asking" much more of our elected officials. "Asking," that is, in ways that can't be ignored. There's a lot to talk about there.

Some of you will have seen this piece from the excellent communicator Dr. Joe Romm: "2017 crushed a major temperature record and scientists are sounding the alarm" (subtitled "All the natural influences should have made the year cooler than normal, not hotter than normal.")

Then, of special note to New Mexicans, we have his "NASA just made a stunning discovery about how fracking fuels global warming" (subtitled: "Natural gas is not part of the climate solution, it's part of the problem.")

We don't know any New Mexico politicians -- candidates and elected officials, both -- who are not supportive of New Mexico's oil and gas industry. Do you? Isn't everyone in the legislature happy to have more oil and gas taxes to spend?

Here's another question. Do you think Obama's methane regulations and Clean Power Plan, touted by Democrats as normative (and as reasons for environmental endorsements, funding, and votes), would make a significant difference in New Mexico's overall greenhouse gas emissions? If so, please do send the math on that. You see, there is a lot to talk about. 

Sincerely,

Greg Mello, for the Study Group

PS On Thursday February 1, from 5 - 6 pm, Greg will be speaking at O'Neill's Pub, 4310 Central Ave SE (map) about the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, sponsored by the National Museum of Nuclear Science and History (yes) as part of their "Science on Tap" series.