briefly explain this idea, which brings into play the thinking of many people in the nuclear field and combines them in a single concept-an ideal toward which we might aim in the future. Basically, the nuplex is a large industrial complex, separate from any urban area, which has as its energy heart a very large nuclear power station-one most likely containing one or more multithousand megawatt breeder reactors and its own fuel recycling facility. The cheap electricity and heat made available by this nuclear system would allow the surrounding complex to perform a variety of industrial miracles. Waste in many forms would be taken in from outlying areas and recycled into essentially new raw materials. SYNTHETIC MATERIALS These would be combined with other natural resources to supply the industrial and manufacturing plants. Able to draw on massive amounts of cheap energy and using highly sophisticated technologies, these plants could turn out the new products of the day. These products would include a great variety of new plastics, solvents, ceramics, metals, and alloys. They might allow us to perform a new level of alchemy-to literally build new materials to specification-new substances like special high- and low-temperature metals for use in extreme space environments, special metals or plastics that are ideal for surgical implantation in the new field of "spare-parts" medicine, or materials that are best for long-lived operation at the bottom of the sea. The range of possibilities perhaps defies the imagination. But of more interest to this subcommittee, I believe, is not what comes out of the nuplex, but what doesn't. This is an industrial complex from which rises no forest of chimneys to pour forth smoke and fumes. Nor does it spew out streams of waste into the nearby rivers and lakes. What it does not use it returns to nature in a most controlled and acceptable form. And this would be an important factor in its economics. A clean environment would be an end product of the nuplex just as important as all the goods and services it produces. The widespread use of the nuplex concept would virtually eliminate the eyesores of the cities and countryside the junkyards, the incinerators and the vast landfill heaps of trash and garbage. More of our land, lakes and waterways could serve our growing recreational needs. Another environmental benefit that would accrue from the nuplex concept is the separation of the city from heavy industry. It might allow us to build new cities designed primarily for human beingsfor their comfort, convenience, commerce, and culture-the type of urban centers that city planners dream of as we in the nuclear field work with our ideal concepts of the agro-industrial centers and the nuplex. CONCLUSIONS While all these thoughts are perhaps far out at a time when we are battling current environmental problems I think they are worth holding up and considering as long-range goals. And I offer them in that context. I know that the work of this subcommittee, and of the other committees in Congress that are so involved in bringing science and tech nology to the public service in the most constructive way, will make a significant contribution to our future progress. We must all work together in this common goal of making science serve the common good. Scientist, engineer, administrator, legislator, industrialist, and educator-we all have a tremendous new level of responsibility in this new and at times awesome age. But if we are willing to make some sacrifices, to cooperate, to listen to and learn from each other, and then move ahead in a concerted effort, we may be able to arrive at a future that offers us both a clean environment and a clean conscience. And this would be a most rewarding combination of goals. Thank you for inviting me to meet with you today. I will be pleased to try to answer any question. HAZARDOUS WASTES Senator SPONG. Thank you, Dr. Seaborg. In the radioactive waste disposal field certain types of waste are completely contained so that they are not released into the environment. Do you anticipate other types of waste that should be looked into to determine if similar practices should be employed? Dr. SEABORG. Do you mean waste in other fields? Senator SPONG. Yes. Dr. SEABORG. Other then the nuclear field and the radioactive field? Senator SPONG. No, we mean in both. Dr. SEABORG. We try to contain, in the nuclear field, as much of the waste as we possibly can, and when it is necessary to release anything to the environment to do it in a controlled manner so that it is released at a concentration which is well below the limit where it might be harmful. I should think that this concept could be applied to other areas as well as those involving radioactive materials. DISPERSION Senator SPONG. In the radioactive waste disposal field low-level wastes are dispersed into nature under careful control and management so as to minimize their impact on the environment and man. This practice of dilution and dispersion is also practiced in the physical and chemical waste fields and has been for a greater length of time. Do you believe that the control of these physical and chemical wastes is adequate to preserve the quality of the environment? Dr. SEABORG. No, I don't think so. I think there are a number of situations where there is dispersal of waste to the environment that could be reduced. There certainly is room for improvement in that area. ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORT Senator SPONG. Do you believe that the work of the Atomic Energy Commission on the movement of radioactive waste through the environment is applicable to physical and chemical materials? Do you feel that this experience is being utilized? Dr. SEABORG. Well, some parts of our expertise in this field, I suppose, could be transferred to the field of moving nonradioactive waste. 95-825 0-68-4 There are of course some aspects of the moving of radioactive waste that are unique to the field of radioactive substances, such as the need to shield the materials to introduce shielding in the containers to protect from the radiation. This is an aspect of our expertise that wouldn't transfer directly to the movement of other materials. However, it is possible to use nuclear techniques to investigate means of diminishing the release of the pollution products to the atmosphere. For example, at our Brookhaven National Laboratory we are using sulfur isotopes in order to study the distribution of sulfur dioxide as a pollution product from the burning of coal, so that, by learning more about its distribution, we can perhaps arrive at better ways of controlling it. PRESIDENT'S SOLID WASTE STUDY Senator SPONG. Does your agency participate in the study of waste disposal practices being conducted by the President's Office of Science and Technology? Dr. SEABORG. Yes, we are. Senator SPONG. What do you consider the contribution that the Atomic Energy Commission can make to this study? Dr. SEABORG. Well, we probably have had as much experience in managing waste disposal as any agency and I would imagine that our experience at our plants and in connection with our regulatory process would be of use in such a study. RECOVERY AND REUSE Senator SPONG. Are any productive uses presently being made on of the waste from the atomic energy used? any Dr. SEABORG. Yes; there are uses for a number of the fission products, like cesium 137, strontium 90, and promethium 147 as heat sources. The source of these products at the present time exceeds the requirements for them, but we can foresee a time in the future when there will be quite extensive use of these products. It is possible to capitalize on their attribute of emitting radiations, either using the radiation directly or, in larger quantities, using them in devices that we refer to as SNAP devices, systems for nuclear auxiliary power, in which the heat of radioactive decay is converted to a more useful form, such as the electrical form, for possible uses in long-lived portable sources of electrical energy. Senator SPONG. Thank you very much, Dr. Seaborg. We appreciate very much your being here. There is a possibility we will submit some additional questions to you in the course of these hearings. Dr. SEABORG. Thank you. We would be glad to respond to them. Senator SPONG. Is Professor Fuller here? Professor Fuller, we are very pleased to have you with us. I understand that you do not have a prepared statement. STATEMENT OF PROF. R. BUCKMINSTER FULLER, ARCHITECTURE DEPARTMENT, SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Professor FULLER. I have no prepared statement but this year I did give the keynote opening talk to the American Medical Association. Their general theme for this year's series of conferences was "What Quality of Environment Do We Want?" and I prepared for them my thoughts very comprehensively. After tape recordings were made and transcribed I then cleaned them up and brought it to a document which embodies everything I said but in much neater form than I had delivered it, I am sure. After talking to you and the Secretary about coming here I thought I better bring this document, because I think it is 10,000 words and it does have everything I would like to say in really very neat form. I thought we might use that if you would like. Senator SPONG. We would be very pleased to receive that,1 Professor, and you go ahead and say whatever you wish to say. Professor FULLER. I just want to be sure you realize that strategically I am called a comprehensivist in contradistinction to the specialists of our day. So many people today are specialists that I think people get a little worried at first hearing me because I seem to be talking about everything, but it does hold together and holds together fairly well. So I will proceed from this and will try to make it very neat for you you would like to do that. if Senator SPONG. All right. Thank you. Professor FULLER. I think that way we will get more information in a shorter time. SCIENCE Eddington defined science as "the earnest attempt to set in order the facts of experience." In attempting earnestly to think about our environment, we realize gradually that the environment is not a static stage set. It is the continually changing sum of all our external experiences. It is omnidynamic and a complex of events. ENVIRONMENT Environment is all else of universe but self. Sometimes it feels superbly synchronous-at others, discordant; 99.999 percent of all the events which constitute the physical and metaphysical universe are undetectable directly by our senses. I find it very important in trying to help society understand our present moment to point out that in a room, for instance, of this size we could bring in, quite tightly, about 100,000 wide-band radio sets. We could tune each one of those radio sets into a different program coming from somewhere around the world. In other words, going through this room right now and not interfering with one another are over 100,000 different programs. The information is coming from out of space as well as from our various satellites; the important thing to remember is that approximately 99.9 percent of everything that is going to affect our future is now being conducted in realms of an electromagnetic spectrum which is completely invisible to man. So I feel that, while man is very prone to think in terms of reality, it is very difficult for him to catch on that his real environment is this enormous electromagnetic spectrum which is invisible to him. Considering and reconsidering clues which may permit our setting the complex educationally compounding facts of our environment in order requires that we first remind ourselves that many experiences 1 The document entitled "What Quality of Environment Do We Want?" appears at p. 55. have shown us the ease with which all our perceptual facilities can be deceived. I was asked to speak before the faculty club of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to give their quarterly address in 1951 and I found all the scientists there agreed with me that they went home to picnics and they would say to their own family, "Look at that beautiful sunset." They would talk about the sun "going down." They all saw the sun going down even though the scientists have had 500 years to organize their senses to the already known fact that the earth is revolving to obscure the sun. Still, their senses are not in accord with their knowledge. In talking about what we have to do to really make a contribution toward reducing the pollution of our atmosphere and trying to organize society to take political action effective to that end, you have to remember that society is really geared into the almost inconsequential seeable range of events and not realizing the much larger patterns. For instance, when I ask an audience how many use the words up and down, everybody agree that they use the words up and down. The words up and down were invented by man to accommodate his thought long ago when he thought that his world was flat and went out to infinity. There were some mountains from time to time but, generally, man thought that his world went out into infinity. As you take extended parallel lines such as, for example, railroad tracks they tend to converge as they go away. Man thought that all the parallel lines perpendicular to his flat plane of reference were as one world going up and one going down; in other words, up to heaven and down to hell. Aviators flying around the earth found that the words "up" and "down" were very inadequate and every scientist would try not to designate any part of the universe as up and down. The aviators had to have better words and chose "in" as they came in to "land" and "out" for taking off. SPACESHIP EARTH With the words "in" and "out," you come into correct relationship to the various masses of the universe and you go out from them. So I find a number of young students today thinking about signs that we are in reality all on board spaceship earth. I find people saying, "I wonder what it would be like to be on a spaceship?" The correct answer is that we are all astronauts and that is all humanity has ever experienced. We launch a little spaceship at a velocity of 15,000 miles an hour from a bigger spaceship-the earth-which is making 60,000 miles per hour around the sun which is 80,000 miles in diameter. We must really catch on to the fact that our planet is really a spaceship and a machine superbly designed to provide for man in spite of his extraordinary ignorance and that man has been, to our knowledge, aboard ship for 2 million years without even knowing he was aboard a ship. We find that today's society hasn't caught on yet. Now, the design for the regeneration of life aboard our spaceship is the very essence of why our society is coming to such meetings as we are having here today. It is extraordinarily hopeful that we are at a point where society is now inquiring into pollution. But what the |