Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Congressional Hearings Transcript

45
•
WERs that have not been turned on because of the political consequences.
Now, here we have three of their newest, theoretically safest versions
of the WER powerplants that they can't throw the switch on
because of the phobia over Chernobyl. There's 3,000 megawatts of
energy that would be a 25 to 30 percent increase in the total
supply. The existing plants that are operating—well, three went
off-line last year, and every day that goes by, the potential for
turning off more plants grows, because they need equipment, they
need training, they need every basic aspect of building the power
and energy infrastructure.
So I think in terms of priorities, some kind of a measure to hold
the Nation together is imperative. If it falls apart, it has consequences
for not just Ukraine and Byelorussia and Russia and the
others, but it has consequences for Europe and the United States.
Senator Graham. One last question before turning to Senator
Lieberman. To what degree do you think the United States should
be approaching this bilaterally or through international agencies,
and if international agencies, which existing agency would you
have most confidence in, or will there be the necessity of creating
new multinational structures to deal with the new conditions?
Dr. Brewer. Well, let me take a stab at that, Mr. Chairman.
There are so many entities and States and agencies and companies
trying to assist that region in nuclear power that it has become
very redundant, will become wasteful as big money starts flowing,
and all of these entities are very well meaning, but there's also a
lot of ambulance chasing, and it must be coordinated.
Senator Graham. So is your summary that there needs to be
more international agency intermediation?
Dr. Brewer. I wouldn't say any more international agencies, but
I think the IAEA is probably the logical international body to help
the former Soviets set priorities on what needs to be done first,
second, third, fourth, and not done at all.
just add to that. My firsthand experience as a
Mr. Dunbar. I'll
United States businessman is we compete in a world where the collaboration
between government and business for our competitors
ismuch closer and much more well orchestrated than it is for ourselves.
I meet competitors in the former Soviet Union, and the support
that they have, direct hand-in-hand support, both in money
and technical support, from their governments, far outstrips our
traditions of how business is done. So when money goes into an
international pot, when the United States taxpayers' money goes
into an international pot to be distributed, this United States competitor
sees himself at a disadvantage.
Mr. Garrity. Senator, I'd just like to add to the previous two
speakers' comments and in fact support the IAEA as the overall coordinating
agency for the standardization of upgrading or decommissioning
of the Soviet reactors. But likewise, I do share a similar
concern as Mr. Dunbar relative to the competitive environment
that we do work in, and as I suggested, I think some form of export
guarantees in the form of additional support to EXIM Bank, and
we, then, as a private industry working globally can successfully
compete both technically and commercially.
Senator Graham. Senator Lieberman.