2015-03-01 Taipei, A national anti-nuclear alliance calling for energy reforms is set to hold a protest march around Taiwan on March 14 to mark the fourth anniversary of Japan‘s Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011. Stop Nukes Now , formed by 126 anti-nuclear organizations, announced that the march will take place simultaneously in Taipei, Kaohsiung and Tainan to convey people’s hope for the government to abolish nuclear power and reform Taiwan’s energy network.
Former Japanese PM warns against Welsh nuclear site renewal By Daily Wales correspondent, 25 Feb 15
The former Prime Minister of Japan has used a visit to Wales to urge the UK Government to scrap its commitment to nuclear energy. He is using the tour to send out a message to the UK Government that the safety risks posed by nuclear energy are simply not worth taking.
“What occurred in Fukushima in 2011 was caused by humans, not a natural disaster. It is clear to me that what caused this catastrophe was our commitment to an unsafe and expensive technology that is not compatible with life on this planet.
“The only safe option when it comes to nuclear power is to abandon your plans for nuclear power. It simply is not worth the risk………
Mr Kan’s visit to Wales has been supported by Welsh anti-nuclear campaign group, People Against Wylfa B (PAWB), Friends of the Earth Cymru, CND Cymru and Welsh language campaign group, Cymdeithas yr Iaith.
Activists petition against nuclear-waste reprocessing http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2015/02/25/2003612205 By Tang Chia-ling Anti-nuclear group Mom Loves Taiwan has launched a petition against state-run Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) call for bids to reprocess about 1,200 bundles of spent fuel rods from the Jinshan and Guosheng nuclear power plants, which Taipower announced on Tuesday last week, one day before Lunar New Year’s Eve.
Taipower has obtained a budget of NT$11.25 billion (US$353 million) to deliver 480 and 720 bundles of spent fuel rods from the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant, in New Taipei City’s Shihmen District (石門), and the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant, in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里), respectively overseas for reprocessing. The reprocessing is to be implemented over four years, with the first batch scheduled to be shipped by the end of this year.
The campaign, dubbed “Help Taiwan & Save The World!! Stop Taipower’s Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Project,” had gathered about 270 signatures as of press time last night. Many signatories are from Japan, where the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant disaster took place in 2011.
The organization hopes to obtain 500,000 signatures and present them to Premier Mao Chi-kuo (毛治國) in the hope that the government will block the project.
Mom Loves Taiwan chief executive Yang Shun-mei (楊順美) said shipping highly radioactive nuclear waste overseas to be reprocessed only means that the waste will be shipped back to Taiwan 20 years later.
She said that nuclear waste reprocessing is a dying industry and that the French-based firm Areva, which is on the brink of bankruptcy, is a case in point.
She said that Avera is reportedly the company to which Taipower plans to send its fuel rods for reprocessing. She said the move would salvage the company from insolvency at the cost of polluting the environment, while bolstering nuclear arms production, and above all, no one would responsible for overseeing the reprocessing operations.
Taiwan Environmental Protection Union member Gloria Hsu (徐光蓉) said that Taipower did not inform the public of the actual cost of nuclear-waste reprocessing and that time and again it has requested more funds from the legislature shortly after its budget has been passed.She added that it did this while constructing the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant.
Naoto Kan was at the helm of his country’s Government at the time of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, the largest incident of its kind since the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
Mr Kan stepped down from office in the wake of the meltdown and has become a staunch anti-nuclear campaigner.
Mr Kan will arrive in Wales from Paris next Wednesday, where he will visit the Senedd and meet in the Pierhead Building with National Assembly Members and other invited guests.
He will then travel north to Anglesey on Thursday, where he will give a talk at the gates of Wylfa nuclear station at 8.45am to urge the public to oppose the development plant.
Mr Kan will then head to the Anglesey Council offices in Llangefni at 11am to address councillors in private, before concluding his trip at 1pm, where he will hold a public meeting at Carreg Brân Hotel, Llanfairpwll.
An Isle of Anglesey County Council spokesperson said: “Following a request on behalf of the Green Cross, Mr Kan will be addressing members of the Council.
“During the meeting we will also be informing him about our Energy Island Programme and its aims.”
No to nuclear nonsense: Groups call on Dominion to abandon plans for North Anna 3 reactorhttp://www.foe.org/news/archives/2015-02-groups-call-on-dominion-to-abandon-plans-for-north-anna-3-reactor Feb. 16, 2015 / Kate Colwell
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Friends of the Earth, with 13 other organizations, submitted a letter to Governor Terry McAuliffe, Members of the Virginia General Assembly, Nuclear Regulatory Commissioners and energy company Dominion Resources urging against building a third nuclear reactor at the North Anna Power Station in Louisa County, Virginia. This proposed reactor would sit on an active earthquake fault and lacks a reliable water supply for cooling three reactors. The letter also emphasized the project’s high cost, a lack of any safe waste disposal solution and other inherent safety concerns related to nuclear reactors.
Friends of the Earth’s former president Brent Blackwelder issued the following statement:
The nuclear tragedy at Fukushima should have made it clear that the risks of nuclear reactors are too great. Yet Dominion Virginia Power and the state of Virginia continue to flirt with disaster. It is unconscionable to spend a single cent on an energy source that carries the inherent risks of nuclear reactors. These risks are exacerbated at North Anna because the reactor sits on a known fault line. This is the same fault that just shook Washington, D.C. in 2011, damaging the Washington Monument and the National Cathedral. Safe, renewable and distributed energy alternatives already exist; and it is time that we stopped investing in false solutions.
Expert contact: Brent Blackwelder, (202) 422-7753, email@example.com
Communications contact: Kate Colwell, (202) 222-0744, firstname.lastname@example.org – See more at:http://www.foe.org/news/archives/2015-02-groups-call-on-dominion-to-abandon-plans-for-north-anna-3-reactor#sthash.hQ9lDM55.dpuf
Tourism, Milk and Cheese or Nuclear? 13 Friday Feb 2015 by miningawareness “…..proximity to Moorside means that the issues are still essentially the same, as described below by the Braystones Concerns Group in their memorandum to Parliament: “Memorandum from Braystones Concerns Group (NWN 15)”
“Job opportunities, economy and economic diversity in West Cumbria.”
“1. Whilst jobs are welcome in West Cumbria, the overall effects of multiple nuclear developments would have many negative effects. What is frequently referred to as an area of outstanding natural beauty, would be greatly defaced by such extensive nuclear industrial sprawl. This would have a detrimental effect on the visitors perception of West Cumbria as a tourist destination. At a time when the area is desperately trying to diversify its economy, tourism jobs would simply be displaced by more ‘nuclear’ jobs, thus not actually increasing real jobs with the numbers being promised.It would greatly increase the economic stranglehold that the nuclear industry has on the area and would discourage many other discerning businesses that might otherwise have chosen West Cumbria. (A £45m cheese factory planned for Workington in West Cumbria did not go ahead in 2007, because of plans by Studsvik to build a radioactive waste processing plant at Lillyhall.) There are already a number of nuclear developments proliferating in West Cumbria, with Copeland and Allerdale councils trying to coax the public into accepting even more.”
“Economic/infrastructure viability of West Cumbria for nuclear power generation.”
“2. West Cumbria is not an economically suitable region for multiple reactor builds, as grid connectivity would prove particularly difficult and costly in such a remote area. West Cumbria is not where energy production is most needed.Any multiple reactor builds should be sited close to centres of high energy demand, where more suitable infrastructures and grid systems already exist. The recent devastation from flooding in West Cumbria has highlighted the wholly inadequate infrastructure throughout the region, which already struggles to service existing industrial demand. Repair and replacement of crucial bridges is currently estimated to take years. The southern sector of the main arterial route through Copeland has been de-trunked and is literally the width of a single vehicle in places. Road closures due to accident or maintenance can require alternative diversion routes 120 miles long. Major road improvements take at least 10 years to provide. If the Braystones site was developed, it would seriously compromise the existing Emergency Arrangements for the Sellafield site.” https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/tourism-milk-and-cheese-or-nuclear/
Emanuel lines up with Exelon critics to push clean-power agenda, Crains, Chicago Business 4 Feb 15 By STEVE DANIELS Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is joining a new coalition of environmentalists, renewable energy companies and labor leaders to lobby Springfield for stronger policies favoring wind and solar power, as well as energy efficiency.
The Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition, whose formation was announced today at Testa Foods on the Southwest Side, notably didn’t include Exelon, the state’s largest power generator, which is preparing to lobby state lawmakers for a financial rescue plan for its six nuclear plants in Illinois.
Emanuel’s unusual participation in the group potentially sets up the mayor as a political foe of Exelon, which in the past has counted on Chicago politicians, notably Emanuel’s predecessor, Richard M. Daley, for political support at the state level.
Speaking at a press conference, Emanuel endorsed the group’s call to boost the state’s already-ambitious renewable energy goal to 35 percent of the power generated in the state by 2030. Current state law calls for 25 percent renewable power by 2025.
The coalition also wants state lawmakers to boost energy efficiency standards to a 20 percent reduction in power consumption by 2025. State law now calls for annual improvements in efficiency, with a mandate to cut power consumption by 2 percent this year.
Finally, the group calls for “market-based strategies” to reduce carbon. One way to do that would be with a new system of charging carbon emitters for the pollution they generate. “A new revenue stream could be used to invest in areas such as workforce development, low-income bill assistance and research and development into new clean energy technology,” the coalition says in a statement.
Adoption of this agenda will create tens of thousands of jobs in Illinois over the next decade, the group claimed……….http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150204/NEWS11/150209897/emanuel-lines-up-with-anti-exelon-crowd-to-push-clean-power-agenda
These two vampire technologies suck the energy out of our planet while permanently poisoning our air, water, food and livelihoods.
The human movements fighting them have been largely separate over the years.
In the wake of Fukushima, the global campaign to bury atomic power has gained enormous strength. All Japan’s 54 reactors remain shut. Germany is amping up its renewable energy generation with a goal of 80 percent or more by 2050. Four U.S. reactors under construction are far over budget and behind schedule. Five old ones have closed in the last two years.
In New England and elsewhere, as the old nukes go down, safe energy activists shift their attention to the deadly realities of fossil fuel extraction.
The issues are familiar. Fracking in particular poisons our water and spews out huge quantities of lethal radiation. Ironically, in Ohio and elsewhere, the seismic instability it creates threatens atomic reactors still in operation.
In California, the burgeoning movement to shut the two remaining nukes at Diablo Canyon has run parallel with the powerful grassroots opposition to fracking. In both cases, water issues in this drought-plagued state have moved front and center.
Now the gap is being bridged. In a passionate hour-long dialog on saving our Earth, long-time anti-fracking activist David Braun speaks with Linda Seeley of the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, the legendary grassroots group that has fought Diablo Canyon for more than four decades.
In their Solartopian radio conversation, and in a call to convene this coming spring, we see the seeds of an intertwined alliance that can help save our Earth: http://prn.fm/solartopia-green-power-wellness-hour-02-03-15/
Among other concerns, Al Fayez questions how a state with such little water will be able to cool a reactor situated more than 200 miles from the shoreline, and whether Jordan has sufficient human capital (i.e., enough nuclear physicists) to safely operate the facilities. She has also expressed dismay with the $10 billion price tag, a sum roughly equivalent to Jordan’s total 2013 annual budget
The Middle East’s Next Nuclear Power? It may not be the one you’re thinking about. Politico, By DAVID SCHENKER January 28, 2015 “…….even as Western attention has focused all around Jordan—and especially on the nuclear negotiations with Iran—in a little-noticed series of moves, the Kingdom’s been edging closer to going nuclear itself. In fact, the Kingdom of Jordan, Washington’s most reliable Arab partner, is the latest Middle Eastern state considering nuclear energy that is refusing to relinquish its right to enrich.
To prevent proliferation, the US has long held that Middle Eastern states seeking nuclear energy must forego the right to enrich nuclear material. The principle of no-enrichment has underpinned the so-called “gold standard” of US-bilateral nuclear agreements……..
—in its December 2009 agreement with the US, the United Arab Emirates acquiesced to forego enrichment and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel……….Over the past four years, the Kingdom has increasingly focused on nuclear energy, in particular the construction of two 1000-megawatt power plants…….Amman’s proposed nuclear facilities have met with opposition both at home and abroad. Washington’s stated opposition to the program revolves around enrichment. Jordan’s resolve to maintain this right has stymied efforts to reach a “123 agreement” governing US international nuclear cooperation……….
Israel, too, has taken issue with Jordan’s nuclear ambitions, primarily due to concerns about safety. Continue reading
Putrajaya ‘hell-bent’ on nuclear plant despite public concerns, says consumer group Malaysian Insider, 1 February 2015 Plans to build a nuclear plant in Malaysia are afoot, warned a consumer group, and said Putrajaya was misleading the public into thinking that it will consult the people on the use of nuclear energy when it had already decided to proceed with a bill to be table in Parliament this year.
Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) president SM Mohamed Idris said the government was “hell-bent” on introducing nuclear power in the country’s energy mix and highlighted statements made by energy officials over the past year and recently which indicated that Malaysia was intent on adopting nuclear energy.
As proof, he cited the setting up of the Malaysian Nuclear Power Corporation (MNPC) in January 2011, and the listing of nuclear energy as an entry point project in the Economic Transformation Programme in 2010.
“The government is hell-bent on introducing nuclear energy in the country’s energy mix.
“It is disingenuous of the government to continue misleading the public with its standard response line that a decision has yet to be made and the government is still exploring the option to go nuclear,” he said in a statement today.
Mohamed also said Putrajaya had announced its intention to table the Atomic Energy Regulatory Bill in August last year, and that the announcement was welcomed by MNPC chief executive officer, Dr Mohd Zamzam Jaafar, who said MNPC was hopeful that the bill would be approved by Parliament this year.
Malaysia, a nett oil exporter, has, in the past, floated the idea of adding nuclear power to its energy mix to meet long-term fuel needs, but such announcements were always greeted with public disapproval.
In 2010, the minister of energy, green technology and water then, Tan Sri Peter Chin, announced plans to build a nuclear plant that would start operations in 2021.
In July last year, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Mah Siew Keong, who oversees the MNPC, had also said that feasibility studies would be conducted on building nuclear plants as a sustainable energy option for Malaysia.
There is no indication yet of where the proposed nuclear plant would be built, but remote locations close to water sources are required in line with international rules. This would leave a limited number of states, such as Pahang, Johor and Terengganu, as possible locations……….
CAP also called upon the public to denounce the soon-to-be completed Malaysian Nuclear Power Infrastructure Development Plan as an “undemocratic and authoritarian” plan. – February 1, 2015. – See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/putrajaya-hell-bent-on-nuclear-plant-says-consumer-group#sthash.2irEgUtq.dpuf
We are deeply disturbed by media reports that the Indian government has capitulated to aggressive U.S. demands and agreed to a deal that indemnifies American nuclear vendors from the consequences of accidents caused by design defects in their reactors.
Preliminary reports suggest that the government has agreed to create an insurance pool, backed by public sector companies, so that any potential American liability can be redirected back to Indian taxpayers. This creates a “moral hazard”, where the Indian people could end up being responsible for mistakes made by a multinational corporation.
The 2010 Indian liability Act is already a weak law heavily biased towards the nuclear industry. It caps the total liability for an accident at a paltry Rs 1,500 crores and takes away the rights of victims to sue the supplier. The much-discussed supplier liability is very limited: the government alone, as the operator, has a right of recourse against the vendor.
So, we fail to understand the Modi government’s motivation for weakening this law even further. The U.S. has nothing attractive to offer in terms of nuclear commerce. The Indian government has agreed to purchase the AP1000 reactors from Westinghouse, and the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) from General Electric. Both these designs are untested. The ESBWR technology is so immature that the design received certification from the U.S. nuclear regulatory commission—the first step before a reactor can be constructed—only last September. Recent reports suggest that construction of AP1000 units has run into trouble in China.
Independent estimates suggest that the cost of electricity from these reactors may exceed Rs. 15 per unit. This is much higher than the tariff from competing sources of electricity.
Therefore, the reality behind the grandiose proclamations made by the Indian government is rather sobering. India has agreed to pay billions of dollars for immature American technology, and then ensured that American companies will not be held to account for any design defects.
We hope that progressive forces and concerned citizens throughout the country will unite to oppose this disturbing development.
Signatures: Continue reading
US govt takes 4 years to respond – and reject – petition to to close Fukushima-style nuclear reactors
Four years later, NRC rejects Beyond Nuclear and 10,000+ co-petitioners’ call to close Fukushima-style reactors Beyond Nuclear 23 jan 15 After nearly four years of behind closed doors deliberations, on January 15, 2015, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued its “Final Director’s Decision” rejecting the April 13, 2011emergency enforcement petition filed by Beyond Nuclear along with more than 10,000 co-petitioners from around the country. The public emergency enforcement petition called for the immediate suspension of the continued operation of the General Electric Mark I boiling water reactors in the U.S. that are identical to Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactors units 1, 2 and 3 that exploded and melted down following the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan.
The NRC makes its best case for dismissing the petition by arguing that “each of the Petitioner’s requests has been addressed through other actions.” We acknowledge that after four years a portion of the actions that we requested in April 2011 have been taken at some of these reactors. However, we strongly disagree with the NRC’s overall conclusion that each and every action request is addressed and that the public health and safety hazard is resolved such that the petition can be legitimately dismissed in total. We remain concerned that the agency is not capable of effective regulation and enforcement given the long standing nature of the Mark I reactor hazards and a recalcitrant nuclear industry that first considers its financial margins over public safety margins.
Regrettably, we recognize that under existing NRC provisions (Chapter 10 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulation Part 2.206) the public has absolutely no recourse to appeal a Director’s Decision to the Commission level or legally challenge Mark I design vulnerability and its operational hazards in a court of law. This denial of due process comes in spite of the fact that agency orders and industry corrective actions referenced in dismissing the petitioner are inadequate half measures that need not be fully implemented for years still to come, if ever. In critical safety areas for the Mark I, the proposed corrective actions credited in the Director’s Decision are not even conceptually finalized nor approved by the regulator as we approach the fourth anniversary of the nuclear catastrophe. Moreover, there are numerous agency staff non-concurrences on how to even proceed with post-Fukushima action plans………….
Any one of the hazards cited for suspension of the operating licenses in the April 2011 petition serves as ample reason for why the GE Mark I reactors need to be promptly and permanently shuttered. But a primary focus remains on the threat of catastrophic failure of the Mark I containment under severe accident conditions.
The petitioners remain concerned that because the GE Mark I containment system is only 1/6th the size by volume of a typical pressurized water reactor like Three Mile Island it will not reliably serve to “contain” the tremendous pressures, extreme heat, explosive hydrogen gas and highly radioactive releases associated with an accident involving reactor core damage. In fact, this was demonstrated by a 100% failure rate of the Mark I containment systems for Fukushima Daiichi Units 1, 2 and 3 which were operating at full power at the time of the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami. The current action plan is a rehash of a 1989 “fix” to deliberately vent a nuclear accident to the environment by temporarily defeating the containment concept to save it from permanent rupture. Moreover, the current NRC order to improve the reliability of containment venting systems similar to those that failed Fukushima, need not be fully implemented by industry until 2019.
Ironically, when the NRC’s Japan Lessons Learned Task Force reviewed the nuclear catastrophe for recommending modifications to the U.S. Fukushima-style reactors, the staff concluded that what was really needed was not only an enhanced hardened containment vent for the controlled release of heat, pressure and explosive gas but requiring the re-institution of the defense-in-depth concept to more reliably contain the high-level radioactive releases that would also be generated by the nuclear accident. On November 29, 2012, the Japan Lessons Learned Task Force recommended that the Commission issue an Order to all GE Mark I and Mark II boiling water reactor operators to promptly install hardened containment vents with the engineered radiation filters as a “cost-benefited substantial safety enhancement.” The nuclear industry vigorously opposed the additional radiation filter concept on economic grounds and “unintended consequences” and successfully lobbied the five-member Commission by majority vote to reject the filter recommendation on containment vents. The Commission instructed the NRC staff to take up consideration of the installation of radiation filters in a proposed rulemaking and gather independent scientific expert experience as well as public and industry comments. However, in December 2014, the NRC rulemaking staff reversed course for considering the addition of external radiation filters and now seeks to abandon the rulemaking process effectively locking out public and independent expert input.
Our common struggle for real public safety, environmental protection and energy independence remains to permanently closing down an inherently dangerous atomic power industry.
Keep your eyes on the prize and hold on. http://www.beyondnuclear.org/freeze-our-fukushimas/2015/1/21/four-years-later-nrc-rejects-beyond-nuclear-and-10000-co-pet.h
As economics slowly kill nuclear power, activists hastened the death of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Facility
Throughout the U.S. and the world, the demise of atomic energy is accelerating. Some 435 reactors are listed worldwide as allegedly operable. But 48 in Japan remain shut in the wake of Fukushima despite the fierce efforts of a corrupt, dictatorial regime to force them back on line. Germany’s transition to a totally nuke-free green energy economy is exceeding expectations. The fate of dozens proposed and operating in China and India remains unclear.
Activists Permanently Shut Down Vermont Yankee Nuke Plant Today Harvey Wasserman | December 29, 2014 The Vermont Yankee atomic reactor goes permanently off-line today, Dec. 29, 2014. Citizen activists have made it happen. The number of licensed U.S. commercial reactors is now under 100 where once it was to be 1,000.
Decades of hard grassroots campaigning by dedicated, non-violent nuclear opponents, working for a Solartopian green-powered economy, forced this reactor’s corporate owner to bring it down. Entergy says it shut Vermont Yankee because it was losing money. Though fully amortized, it could not compete with the onslaught of renewable energy and fracked-gas. Throughout the world, nukes once sold as generating juice “too cheap to meter” comprise a global financial disaster. Even with their capital costs long-ago stuck to the public, these radioactive junk heaps have no place in today’s economy—except as illegitimate magnets for massive handouts. Continue reading
|Nuclear Program Has ‘Hurt Iran More Than Iraq War’, Payvand Iran News, 18 Dec 14|
|By Golnaz Esfandiari, RFE/RL Iran’s nuclear activities and ambitions faced rare, blunt criticism at a roundtable at Tehran University, where one of the speakers said the damage done by the nuclear program was greater than that by the 1980-88 war with Iraq, which left tens of thousands dead and caused much devastation.
“The imposed war [with Iraq] did not damage us as much as the nuclear program has,” professor Sadegh Zibakalam said at the December 17 roundtable, according to reports by Iranian semiofficial news agencies.
Zibakalam also criticized the lack of public debate about the nuclear issue.
Other speakers were also critical of the nuclear program and its costs for Iranians, who have come under unprecedented U.S.-led sanctions that have made life more difficult.
Speaking at the event, former reformist lawmaker Ahmad Shirzad said nothing had come out of the nuclear program, “not even a glass of water.”…….
Shirzad said that he welcomed Iran’s official line, according to which the country is against building and acquiring nuclear weapons.
The former lawmaker also seemed to suggest that Iran would be better off without a civil nuclear program. “Iran doesn’t have the primary resources and know-how for a nuclear program,” he was quoted as saying by ISNA. He said Iran could assert itself in areas such as petrochemistry and natural gas, where the country has the resources and the knowledge………….
Criticism of the nuclear issue has been a red line in Iran, where media face tough censorship rules in their news coverage.
Shirzad said the nuclear issue has turned into a matter of “honor.” “When something becomes a matter of honor, discussing it is not possible anymore. And that has been our problem for the past 11 years,” he said.
Zibakalam said that under Iran’s previous administration, criticism of the nuclear issue was impossible. “Unfortunately from 2003 to 2013, debate about the different aspects of the nuclear issue was not possible. I believe that whenever people and the press are prevented from expressing their opinions on different issues, the result is not good,” he was quoted as saying.
He added that during those years whenever he would send a slightly critical piece to the press, “the editors would dump it in the closest trash can.”………http://www.payvand.com/news/14/dec/1098.html
AMAN is convinced that nuclear power is neither cheap, clean nor safe. “It is not required for the generation of electricity in Malaysia,” said Aman chairman Dr. Ronald McCoy in a statement.
“AMAN therefore rejects the construction of any nuclear power plant (NPP) in Malaysia.”
AMAN, according to its statement, has taken this position, based on seven key factors: possibility of nuclear weapons proliferation; energy security; extremely expensive; vulnerable to natural disasters and accidents; a ticking time bomb; Malaysia’s existing and planned electricity by other means are sufficient; and the rate of construction of NPPs is skydiving.
AMAN was aware of the ongoing dissemination of false information by the nuclear industry and other vested interests, added the NGO, and “there has not been any genuine transparency of the government’s intentions nor sincere public consultation”.
“Our country must not make the serious mistake of investing in and constructing a nuclear power plant, particularly when there is no existing method of safely disposing the long-lasting radioactive nuclear waste, which will threaten the health of future generations of Malaysians.”
Globally, the use of nuclear power as an energy source was in decline, the statement points out.
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- indigenous issues
- marketing of nuclear
- opposition to nuclear
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- weapons and war
- 2 WORLD
- MIDDLE EAST
- NORTH AMERICA
- SOUTH AMERICA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- rare earths
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual