OLR (I 98 | ) 28 (12)
F, General
F250. Waste disposal and pollution (see also B 3 5 0 - A t m o s p h e r i c p o l l u t i o n , C 2 1 0 W a t e r p o l l u t i o n , E 3 0 0 - E f f e c t s of p o l l u t i o n ) 81:6809 Israel, Yu.A. and A.V. Tsiban, 1981. Problems of monitoring the ecological consequences of ocean pollution. J. oceanogr. Soc. Japan, 36(6):293-314. In this review, a systemization of pollution consequences is utilized as an approach to ecosystems monitoring. Included are sections on harmful pollutants in seawater, biota, deposits and sediments; ecological consequences of marine environmental pollution; biological effects of pollution as an indicator of marine ecosystem changes; and scientific aspects of the management of ecological monitoring. Dept. of Mar. Biol. Monitoring, State Oceanogr. Inst., Propotkinskij per. 6, 119034 Moscow G-34, USSR. (smf) 81:6810 Jamies~n, D., Robin Chalmers, J.M. Sidwick, Richard Barnard, J.E. Portmann and M.G. Norton, 1980/81. Toxic materials in industrial effluents. Symposium held in Newcastle-uponTyne, 28 October 1980. Chem. Ind., 1981(8): 267-290; 4 papers. Symposium papers include: ultimate land disposal, amounts and effects of toxic materials discharged to sewers, pre-discharge treatment, and marine disposal of toxic substances. Measures introduced since 1960 (in Britain and Europe) to control marine discharges are considered. As many wastes are not equally suitable for disposal on land and at sea, general guidelines are suggested for ocean disposal of environmentally acceptable wastes. (smf) 81:6811 Norton, M.G., 1981. The Oslo and London Dumping Conventions. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 12(5):145-149. The London (global) and Oslo (North Sea region) Dumping Conventions, concluded in 1972, have indeed stopped some dumping practices (e.g., vinyl chloride process residues) and encouraged effective legal and administrative control by many countries. The main areas in which the conventions work are described; their effects are reviewed. Trends since 1975/76 in the Oslo Convention area indicate an increase in industrial dumping, and an increase in sewage sludge dumping by the U.K. Relationships (e.g., overlapping and duplication) between global and regional conventions are considered. M A F F Directorate of Fish. Res., Fish Lab., Burnhamon-Crouch, Essex CMO 8HA, UK. (smf)
901
81:6812 Shea, J.F. III, 1981. Formulating nuclear waste management policy: the scientific community and government must plan for the long term. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 368:67-80. While policy for U.S. nuclear programs (commercial and military) was established 20-30 years ago, policy for nuclear waste management was not. A substantial backlog (in the millions of gallons) of partially reprocessed wastes exists, and the commercial nuclear program generates ~1300 metric tons of spent fuel annually--a figure that will more than double by 1985. Formulation of a policy for conscientious nuclear waste management (which may include, e.g., retrieval options for stored wastes as well as safe spent-fuel storage) will involve 'decisions which must last perhaps into the next ice age,' and must transcend the level of political decision-making. (smf) 81:6813 Siever, Raymond, 1981. Radioactive waste disposal: burial under land or sea? Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 368:81-92. While it is imperative that plans be made for proper nuclear waste disposal, caution is urged until satisfactory answers to the many problems posed by underground storage can be obtained. Credibility of the U.S. Department of Energy and other government and industry bodies over the last few decades is discussed. The author concludes that 'a trusted, honest government should be able to systematically research the important questions in the next 8-10 years.' Some of those questions deal with storage containers, availability of actual-site geological data, and design of research programs to find answers rather than to quiet criticism. Dept. of Geol. Sci., Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. 02138, USA. (smf)
F260. Resources, management, economics 81:6814 Anonymous, 1981. New whaling quotas anger conservationists. New Scient., 90(1250):p.204. A 2-year agreement shifts management of the bowhead whale from N O A A to the Alaskan Eskimo Whaling Commission. Eskimos will be allowed to land more than the yearly quotas by paying a 'civil assessment' ($1000-$5000) for each whale over quota. Cynics claim the quotas are unachievable and that the bowhead will be wiped out, thus removing