The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry

Former PM Naoto Kan says Fukushima nuclear disaster is still unfolding

logo-Tokyo-OlympicsFukushima nuclear accident not over yet, says ex-PM Kan 
 JAN. 28, 2016  WASHINGTON —

Former Prime Minister of Japan Naoto Kan says the nuclear accident at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant is not over, despite nearly five years having passed since a massive earthquake and tsunami triggered the disaster.

“There is no doubt” radioactive materials have been seeping into the sea after mixing with underground water, Kan, who has been a vocal critic of nuclear energy since the accident, told the National Press Club in Washington on Tuesday.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said the issue of water contaminated with radioactive substances at the Fukushima plant is “under control” on various occasions including his presentation to pitch Tokyo as host of the 2020 Olympic Games.

“The accident is still unfolding” at the nuclear plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co., Kan said.

Kan was prime minister when the world’s worst nuclear crisis after Chernobyl occurred following the massive earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011.

Kan, a lawmaker of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan, also criticized Abe’s decision to raise the ratio of electricity produced by atomic energy to 20-22 percent of the total output in 2030.

“The goal is not achievable” unless Japan extends the maximum legal period of nuclear plant operation or build a new nuclear plant, Kan said.Japan has halted most nuclear reactors since the Fukushima disaster out of concerns about the safety.

Kansai Electric Power Co. is set to reactivate a nuclear reactor at its Takahama plant on the Sea of Japan coast Friday in what would be the third restart since new safety standards were put in place after the quake.

January 28, 2016 Posted by | Japan, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Nuclear scientist – it’s unwise to rebuild Ontario nuclear plant

flag-canadaScientist calls $12.8B rebuild of Ontario nuclear plant ill-advised, CTV News, The Canadian Press  January 27, 2016  TORONTO —  The proposed $12.8-billion refurbishment of four nuclear reactors at the Darlington generating station is an ill-advised make-work project that will end up soaking taxpayers, a retired nuclear scientist says.

In a letter to Ontario’s energy minister, obtained by The Canadian Press, Frank Greening warns of the formidable technical hazards he says will undermine rosy projections for the project.

“I am quite mystified that you would consider the refurbishment of Darlington to be some sort of solution to Ontario’s economic woes, when in fact the premature failures of (nuclear reactors) are a major cause of Ontario’s economic problems,” writes Greening, a frequent critic of the industry.

“Spending billions of dollars trying to patch up Darlington’s four dilapidated reactors will simply continue the bleeding.”

Earlier this month, the province’s publicly owned generating giant, Ontario Power Generation, announced plans to start refurbishing Darlington — situated east of Toronto on Lake Ontario — this fall. The project aims to extend the life of the CANDU reactors, scheduled for permanent shutdown in 2020, by 30 years……..

Greening argues the units are in need of rebuilding prematurely because their pressure tubes and feeder pipes will soon fail fitness tests. He also warns the reactors’ massive steam generators, which are not part of the proposed project, have had a less than stellar track record and will more than likely need replacement.

“Replacing these steam generators is fraught with very serious problems, both technical and economic, that could prevent the continued operation of Darlington beyond 2030,” says Greening, a senior scientist with OPG until he retired in 2000.

“The decision to proceed with the refurbishment of Darlington could prove to be a disastrous mistake if it is discovered that steam generator replacement is in fact needed in the next 10 to 15 years.”

Environmental groups also argue such projects always run massively over budget and have cost taxpayers untold billions in the past and refurbishment is simply not worth the potential radiation risk to public safety.

The Ontario cabinet has so far given the green light to refurbish one of Darlington’s reactors. OPG would need separate approvals for each of the other three units……….

January 28, 2016 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear | 1 Comment

Bangladesh: calls to stop Russia’s nuclear project

Russian-BearProminent Bangladeshis ask Russia not to build nuclear power plant, Bellona,  January 11, 2016 by , translated by Charles Digges  ROOPUR, Bangladesh – Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom and the government of Bangladesh have signed a deal to invest $12.65 billion in a project to build two 1200 MWe nuclear power units at Rooppur.

ROOPPUR, Bangladesh – Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom and the government of Bangladesh have signed a deal to invest $12.65 billion in a project to build two 1200 MWe nuclear power units at Rooppur…….

Bangladesh, with its population of 150 million people, is one of the poorest countries in Southeast Asia, and is often rocked by political turbulence, terrorism and attacks on foreigners.

But in keeping with Rosatom’s practice of padding its foreign order book, the Bangladesh project looks like another in a long list of reactor export deals relying on huge credits financed by Russian taxpayers to countries that have scant chanced of repaying them.

Russia has already earmarked $500 million in credit to Bangladesh, and the start of construction will still require a few more loans from the Russian budget. That may be a hard sell, given Atomenergoprom, Rosatom’s foreign reactor building wing, last year suffered an embarrassing credit rating downgrade to a “BBB –.”

And where the deal earlier envisioned building Russia’s well-test work-horse VVER-1000 reactor, newer documents stipulate Bangladesh will receive the VVER-1200, which still has not been used for industrial-scale energy production ever.

Local’s who stand against the plan have also told Bellona that Bangladesh can fair fine on cheaper and readily available renewables and other climate friendly solutions it is now obligated to pursue as one of the 195 signatories of the Paris accord.

The plan for the Bangladesh has elicited criticism from experts in the local population, and Bellona has interviewed Bangladeshis who are against the import of Russian nuclear reactors.

One of these is Nusrat Islam Khan, a journalist from the city of Pabna in Bangladesh’s central district, which is where the plant would, in fact, be located. Her chief concern is that the plant’s construction was a political, not a popular decision…….

Another prominent Bangladeshi who spoke with Bellona was Arup Rahee, of the Center for Bangladeshi Studies……

January 11, 2016 Posted by | ASIA, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Young Japanese activist takes up the torch for nuclear disarmament

Japanese student activist to keep up lifelong fight against nuclear arms, Japan Times, BY 

KYODO  JAN 11, 2016  YOKOHAMA – For aging atomic bomb survivors, it is a matter of grave concern whether their long-running campaign to see the abolition of nuclear weapons will be continued by the next generation, and just as important to them as passing on their memories of the 1945 bombings.

They may have a ray of hope in a 23-year-old descendant of an atomic bomb survivor who is working for a better future through a range of activities, most recently as a member of the student group that spearheaded last year’s protests against the security laws.

Mitsuhiro Hayashida is one of the founding members of SEALDs (Students Emergency Action for Liberal Democracy-s), which was launched in May, and has also been deeply committed since his teenage days to the effort to ban nuclear weapons.

“What drives me in my current actions are the words of the hibakusha I have heard all my life,” the senior student at Meiji Gakuin University in Tokyo told the audience at an event in October to oppose the security laws and nuclear arms.

Born in Nagasaki, Hayashida has been immersed in local peace education since his childhood and grew up listening to the accounts of people who survived the city’s bombing, including his grandfather, who entered the city shortly after the blast and handled dead bodies…….

Realizing that civilian use of nuclear power can expose people to radiation just like atomic bombs, Hayashida was drawn to protests in front of the prime minister’s office in 2012. These demonstrations also drew the other youths who would go on to form SEALDs, such as the group’s leading figure, Aki Okuda, who was also attending Meiji Gakuin University.

While Hayashida’s current focus is on repealing the security laws that passed the Diet in September, expanding the role of the Self-Defense Forces overseas, he believes the activities of SEALDs are also connected to his mission to abolish nuclear weapons.

“I think debating national security issues will eventually lead to (the question of whether we need) atomic bombs, so in my mind these two issues are linked,” he said……..

January 11, 2016 Posted by | Japan, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Intense unpopularity of nuclear industry in South Korea

About 11,000 county residents participated in the referendum. Of them, nearly 92 percent voted against a nuclear power plant.
flag-S-KoreaBitter Debate Over Nuclear Power Simmers in Rural South Korea, NYT By  JAN. 5, 2016“……… in 2010, the 399 mostly older people who made up the population of three villages agreed to give up their land and their centuries-old way of life to make room for something few other places wanted: a nuclear power plant.

That act plunged the surrounding Yeongdeok County into a bitter debate over whether the plant would be a savior or a death knell. The clash also revealed the depth of despair in South Korea’s increasingly empty rural communities, as well as growing misgivings about the country’s heavy dependence on nuclear power…….

villagers like Shin Wang-ki, 56, who grows pears, apples and peaches and believed that a plant would mean the end to a longstanding and cherished way of life.

“No way! Who’s going to buy fruits or crabs from an area near a nuclear power plant?” he said. “I inherited a clean land from my ancestors and want to leave it untainted for my children.”……..

In 2012, South Korea selected Yeongdeok and Samcheok, a coastal city to the north, as sites for new reactors.

Yet by then, skepticism — and anxiety — was spreading. First came the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan. Then came another shock: Reports that emerged after a series of scandals revealed that nuclear power plants across South Korea had been using parts whose safety test results were faked.

Last year, a new mayor in Samcheok called a referendum in which residents voted against the decision made under the previous mayor. When the mayor of Yeongdeok refused to do likewise, residents opposed to the plant began organizing and outside activists poured in. They called a referendum on their own in November.

The government and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Company, the country’s operator of nuclear power plants, urged residents not to take part in the referendum, which they called illegal because a state project was not subject to a county-level plebiscite. They also accused the outsiders of bringing antinuclear activism here to impede an important national project. Antinuclear villagers went on hunger strikes, accusing Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power executives of bribing older villagers with watermelons and other gifts.

“People yelled at each other,” said Kwon Tae-hwan, who runs a local Internet news site. “They waged a war of banners, every single back alley strung with rival placards.”

About 11,000 county residents participated in the referendum. Of them, nearly 92 percent voted against a nuclear power plant.

Antinuclear activists claimed victory, while the government dismissed the result and reconfirmed its plan to build a plant here.The civil disobedience in Yeongdeok represented only one of the many challenges South Korea’s nuclear power industry faced, problems it never had to confront when the first reactor went into operation in 1978 under an authoritarian government. In June, a government committee warned that beginning in 2019, old plants would run out of storage space for high-level radioactive wastes. The country urgently needed to build a new, central repository for such wastes, it said.

But the government could not even start looking. Residents of Miryang, a village in the southeast, have recently staged prolonged protests, including a self-immolation, to oppose a far smaller potential hazard: high-voltage transmission towers to carry electricity from a distant nuclear plant…….Residents on both sides of the nuclear question are waiting for parliamentary elections in April, when candidates from Yeongdeok will be asked to take sides.

“Among people here, what the government said used to be the law and truth,” said Kim Eok-nam, 47, who believed his dream of marketing organic farm produce would evaporate with the arrival of a nuclear plant. “But over this nuclear power project, we will show we are no rural pushover.”

January 6, 2016 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, South Korea | Leave a comment

Renewed calls to shut down aging Indian Point nuclear station

reactor--Indian-PointNew calls to shut Indian Point; plant’s critics cite age, proximity to cities, North , DECEMBER 27, 2015BY SCOTT FALLON A nuclear power plant just 15 miles from North Jersey is at a crossroads as federal regulators determine whether to allow Indian Point in Westchester County to continue operating for another two decades in the face of fierce opposition from New York officials.

A series of mishaps this year, including one in which a reactor was shut down this month, has renewed calls by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to close the aging plant on the Hudson River. They come as an arm of the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission continues to scrutinize Indian Point’s application to renew the licenses on its two reactors, a marathon process that began eight years ago.

In a scathing letter to the commission last month, a top Cuomo official called the 40-year-old reactors brittle and fatigued, and said the plant’s proximity to a major population center makes it impossible to have an effective evacuation plan.

“Given the deterioration of this aging plant, it should not be permitted to operate for another 20 years,” wrote Jim Malatras, director of state operations in New York.

A spokesman for Entergy Corp., which owns Indian Point, did not respond to a request for comment……

The reactors’ 40-year licenses have expired — Unit 2 in 2013 and Unit 3 on Dec. 12 — but they are allowed to operate while the renewal process continues…….

Evacuation zone

Indian Point has long been a concern of North Jersey officials because Bergen and Passaic counties sit just outside the plant’s federally designated 10-mile evacuation zone, which critics have long said is too small. New Jersey has developed emergency plans, including one to accept thousands of people from Rockland County if need be.

New Jersey has not weighed in on Indian Point’s future. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has not submitted any comments to the NRC because it has “no regulatory role” over the plant, said Larry Hajna, an agency spokesman.

Indian Point’s relicensing saga comes during a relatively quiet time for New Jersey’s own nuclear industry. Three nuclear reactors have been approved to operate for several more decades while a fourth – Oyster Creek in Ocean County – is scheduled to close by the end of the decade. Although Governor Christie has called for  another reactor to be built in New Jersey, plans by the state’s largest electric utility to build one in Salem County are on hold.

In New York, Cuomo is trying disrupt Indian Point’s relicensing efforts by denying a certification under the state’s Coastal Zone Management Plan. In a report sent to NRC last month, New York officials reiterated much of the criticism leveled at Indian Point through the years: That there is no way New York City and its densely populated suburbs could be adequately evacuated if a disaster occurred, the plant is vulnerable because it sits near two fault lines, and a billion fish and other marine organisms are killed annually when they are sucked from the Hudson River into the plant’s intake valves.

Some environmental advocates say the report could disrupt Indian Point’s license renewal. A New York court has said the plant is exempt from the state’s review. That decision is being appealed……..

December 30, 2015 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Vehement anti nuclear protests in India

India-protestIndia’s nuclear solution to global warming is generating huge domestic protests Transparency and accountability are lacking at India’s largest nuclear park, where a Russian reactor was constructed with faulty parts over violent local resistance Center for Public Integrity By Adrian Levy  , 15 Dec 15 

Key findings:

  • India is planning to curb its greenhouse gas emissions partly by opening dozens of nuclear reactors over the next two decades, but domestic opposition to additional reactors has been fierce.  
  • Citizens have been alarmed by the nuclear industry’s poor reactor safety record and by evidence that the country’s new Russian-built reactors contain defective parts due to corrupt manufacturing.  
  • The government has reacted aggressively to the protests, arresting hundreds of thousands of participants and depicting some of them as stooges of the United States and other foreign powers who harbor anti-Indian sentiments.  
  • The vehemence of the protests raises questions about the Indian government’s plan to use nuclear power to keep from becoming the world’s largest contributor to global warming over the next 35 years.  

Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu, INDIA — In a town riven by blackouts every summer, the startup in December of commercial operations for a multi-billion-dollar, Russian-built nuclear reactor near here would ordinarily have been a cause for celebration.

It was more than a billion dollars over its budget and six years late. But its full operation in Kudankulam, a remote fishing village in the southern tip of India, 1,700 miles from the capital, was portrayed by operators and builders from the two countries as the latest symbol of their national friendship and technical prowess, as well as a showcase step in India’s ambitious plan to bring a total of 57 reactors on line to power the subcontinent’s economic surge.

S.P. Udayakumar, a bespectacled 56-year-old schoolteacher and protest leader in the region, isn’t rejoicing, however. From his bungalow in Nagercoil, a town 30 miles west of the plant whose wealth rests on making coconut fiber and the spice trade, Udayakumar has organized a long-running protest movement that’s drawn in a large number of residents — hundreds of thousands.

It’s motivated, he says, by research that sympathetic lawyers and nuclear experts have conducted into the reactor’s problematic construction as well as the checkered safety records of the giant Indian and Russian consortiums that erected it. Although the reactor is now shuttered again for maintenance — due to problems with parts supplied by a Russian company that Moscow authorities have accused of wrongdoing — a second reactor at this vast nuclear park, India’s largest, should be completed soon, after fourteen years of construction and testing, to be followed by two more reactors next year.

Udayakumar worries that the massive new Russian pressurized-water reactors, of a size and type never before seen on the subcontinent, have been constructed of shoddy material; that their design and location leave them vulnerable to a flooding disaster like the one experienced by Japan’s Daichi reactor at Fukushima; and that India’s nuclear regulators are either asleep at the switch or under the thumb of pro-nuclear officials that he believes cannot be trusted. In Oct. 2011, the country’s prime minister attempted at a direct meeting to persuade Udayakumar these concerns were unwarranted, but without luck.

His complaints — many of which are backed up by documents obtained by the Center for Public Integrity from the country’s nuclear regulator, retired government officials, government auditors, and industry analysts — were echoed in an unprecedented letter sent in May 2013 to India’s prime minister by 60 of the country’s most prominent scientists, most of them pro-nuclear and working for elite state-run institutions. Their letter called for a moratorium in Kudankulam, while new inquiries were made into allegations of widespread corruption and a fraud associated with the fabrication of the reactor’s components in Russia.

The outcome of this bitter debate has implications far outside India’s borders…….

December 17, 2015 Posted by | India, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Jaitapur activists write to Japan’s PM to cease promoting the nuclear industry

flag-indiaJaitapur nuclear power project: Protesters write to Japan PM, warn of stepping up pressure . 10 Dec 15  

Recently, a top officer of the Fukushima plant Akira Ono as well as Naohiro Masuda, president of Tepco’s Fukushima Daiichi Decommissioning Company, have both admitted that there is no existing technology to remove the melted cores; that such technology may not be available for hundreds of years, and it may be impossible to decommission the stricken reactors. Thus the radioactive contamination may continue indefinitely for hundreds of years. Further, there is increasing evidence that rates of incidence of thyroid cancers among children near Fukushima have increased sharply,” the letter claimed.

The letter added that councils of all the 27 villages surrounding the proposed Jaitapur project have passed unanimous resolutions to oppose it.

“We, therefore, once again reiterate strongly our request that in the light of its own experience with radioactive contamination, Japan should shun any agreement for the promotion of the use of nuclear power. If our request goes unheeded, then be cautioned that we will be forced to step up national and international pressure against this policy of your government and build public opinion in both our countries, as well as all over the world against the double
standards it represents,” the letter warned.

Say in light of its own experience, Japan should not put profits of its nuclear industry before the environment. Written by Mihika Basu | Mumbai | Published:December 11, 2015 CLAIMING that in the wake of opposition to nuclear power in Japan, the nuclear industry there was protecting its profits by getting into a civil nuclear agreement with India, the Maharashtra-based outfit ‘Jaitapur Anuveej Prakalpvirodhi Abhiyan’ (JAPVA) or ‘campaign against Jaitapur nuclear power project’ has written letters to the Prime Minister of Japan and the National Diet of Japan and stated that “it is highly unethical and immoral on your part to put profits of nuclear industry before lives of millions of Indian citizens and environment”. Continue reading

December 11, 2015 Posted by | India, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

The dangers of transporting nuclear waste by sea

ship radiationNuclear waste transport risks ,Tor Justad,   “…..I would wish to draw attention to the proposal from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to transport nuclear waste by sea from Scrabster to Barrow – a distance of over 400 miles.

This high level nuclear waste/spent fuel emanates from the Dounreay nuclear site and is intended for Sellafield – described as “the most toxic nuclear site in Europe”.

The campaigning group Highlands Against Nuclear Transport (Hant) has been campaigning since 2013 to stop this plan on the grounds that the risk to the environment, fishing, aquaculture and tourism is unacceptable.

Transporting nuclear waste by sea is opposed by environmental groups throughout the world and Hant is of the view that all nuclear waste should remain on the sites where it is produced which is in line with Scottish government policy. Hant provided an input at a Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) seminar in Lerwick in August 2015 on “Transportation of Dounreay’s nuclear materials by rail or by sea to Sellafield – is it a safe solution for reducing the nuclear legacy in Scotland?” and was pleased to hear from SIC and Kimo representatives at that seminar that they supported Hant’s position.

The need for emergency response vessels stationed around the Northern Isles and Western Isles is important to safeguard these coasts against marine accidents and emergencies  of any kind but the need is increased by the proposal to transport nuclear waste.

As is well known, nuclear radiation knows no land or sea boundaries so this issue is of concern to all coastal communities in the Highlands and Islands.

Hant will continue to campaign on this issue and would urge individuals and interested organisations to support this campaign.


December 9, 2015 Posted by | oceans, opposition to nuclear, safety, UK | Leave a comment

Paris COP21 anti-nuclear activists arrested after daring climb on Arche de la Defense

protest COP21Anti-nuclear climbers defy Paris protest ban, four arrested  Four anti-nuclear activists defied the state of emergency ban on public protest in Paris on Wednesday, December 2, climbing up the steel cables beneath the modern Arche de la Defense to hang banners. French environmentalists joined German climbers from the action group in the ascent as the COP 21 climate talks were underway. They first deployed small banners reading “Don’t Nuke the Climate – Stop EPR” (referring to the latest French reactor design). Police were quickly on the scene, including 20 from a specially equipped mountain brigade in town for the event. They pursued the climbers up the cables and prevented a larger banner from unrolling which would have proclaimed “System Change, Not Climate Change!”

The four were taken into custody and charged with disrupting public order and violating the state of emergency before their release some hours later. The action was part of international “Climate Games”, a call to direct action against institutions responsible for climate change.

Their statement said:

“States gathered at the COP 21 are powerless to prevent climate catastrophe. Their interests are too intertwined with those of multinationals. For the political change needed to happen, it is for the people to put pressure on governments and companies responsible for climate change.

“Given the climate problem, a capitalist economic system based on growth can only give us false solutions: geo-engineering, carbon markets and of course nuclear. It does not get us out of the impasse. It feeds unbridled energy consumption… ‘System change’ is to refuse the colonial wars of appropriation of resources and ecosystem changes that cause desperate migration, exacerbate ethnic and religious tensions, and contribute to the nihilistic radicalization of a minority. Faced with the threat of terrorism and the draconian response of the State, it is all the more urgent to carry this message to the heart of French economic power.”

Climber Cécile Lecomte wrote:

“In the international climate debate, uncontrolled economic growth is not discussed as a key driver of climate change. Nuclear power is totally unsuitable as a remedy to destructive economic growth. Instead of focusing on risky technologies, in particular the industrialized countries are invited to take a change of system – towards a democratic, social and ecological economy that is aligned to the needs of all people. Less is more!”

For more information, visité-etat-d-urgence

December 6, 2015 Posted by | Finland, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

India’s Bhopal gas victims call on PM Modi to shun nuclear power industry


Abe to India

Five organisations working for the gas victims in a letter to Japanese PM Abe scheduled to visit New Delhi on December 11 to hold annual summit talks with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi urged him to shun the idea of selling nuclear technology after Fukishima disaster more so because the Indian Government has totally failed in the responding to the aftermath of Bhopal disaster and poisons of Union Carbide and Dow Chemical continue to find new victims every day, even after 31 years of the disaster. The letter to the Japanese PM further says that the victims of Bhopal continue to struggle for justice, adequate compensation and proper medical, economic, social and environmental rehabilitation even after 31 years of the tragedy.

The organisations also warned him that to make their pleas heard citizens in Japan and people in India living near existing and proposed nuclear power plants would stage protests during his upcoming visit to India.

They said that one of the main reasons they were opposed to the India-Japan nuclear agreement is that in India, the implementation of environment and labour laws are pathetic. The letter said that  they also realise that this nuclear agreement has nothing to do with the energy situation in this country, rather the sole aim is to restore some confidence in the global nuclear lobby, which is facing its terminal crisis after Fukushima.

They said , “We urge you to desist from this impending agreement during your visit to India. We want strong relationship between India and Japan. We want both countries to come closer and work on technologies that make human lives better—renewable energy sources, effective decontamination and more accessible medicines. For a better future for India and Japan, and for safety, security and prosperity of our people, let us shun the nuclear path and opt for a peaceful future”.

December 6, 2015 Posted by | India, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Green party of Ontario (GPO) strongly opposes nightmare prospect of Liberals rebuilding 6 nuclear reactors

Liberal nuclear dreams are a nightmare for Ontario, Amy Watson, 3 Dec1 5      Efforts to reduce electricity bills and build the renewable energy sector were dealt a killer blow today. Media Release (12/03/2015) Queen’s Park – “It’s a nightmare for Ontario to make a deal to rebuild six reactors at Bruce,” says GPO leader Mike Schreiner. “Spending billions on nuclear will drive up electricity prices with toxic energy.”

logo Greens Ontario

“Why are the Liberals wasting your money on nuclear power that we don’t need without any public oversight or input? This is especially odd after the Auditor General criticized the government for excess supply,” Schreiner adds.

Ontario currently has a surplus of power. The province’s base load generation from 2015 to 2020 will exceed demand according to Ontario’s Auditor General. Excess supply cancels out any financial savings from conservation and energy efficiency programs.

No nuclear project in Ontario’s history has delivered on time or budget. The GPO has collected over 1000 signatures on a petition calling on the government to conduct an independent public review of the costs of and alternatives to rebuilding the Bruce B Nuclear Station and the Darlington Nuclear Station.

“It’s irresponsible for Ontario to spend billions on nuclear when they have access to more affordable, emission free electricity,” says GPC leader Elizabeth May. “The risks are too high to spend money on rebuilding nuclear reactors that threaten the Great Lakes.” Ontario does not have a plan for storing radioactive nuclear waste, nor does it have a public emergency plan to deal with a Fukushima-scale nuclear accident. Canadian taxpayers are on the hook for any nuclear accident that exceeds $1 billion.

Greens continue to oppose nuclear waste dumps that threaten the Great Lakes. The federal Green Party also seeks an amendment to the Nuclear Liability Act to increase maximum insured liabilities from $1 billion to $13 billion, which is the amount for which U.S. reactors are insured.

“We simply can’t leave a legacy of toxic waste and financial debt for our children and future generations,” says Schreiner. “Greens demand an independent public review of the costs of and alternatives to nuclear power.”

The GPO is on a mission to bring honesty, integrity and good public policy to Queen’s Park.

December 4, 2015 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear, politics | Leave a comment

New York City and State Department oppose relicensing of Indian Point nuclear plant

reactor--Indian-PointNew York expresses opposition to relicensing Indian Point as NRC hears issues 18 Nov 2015. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is strongly opposed to the renewal of the operating licenses for the two reactors at the 2,069-MW Indian Point nuclear plant and has asked the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to deny Entergy’s application to extend its operations.

In a letter dated Monday, Jim Malatras, director of New York state operations, reiterated the state’s opposition to relicensing the units as the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board began hearings to address issues raised during the application process.
The hearings began Monday and will continue through the week.
The plant’s proximity to a major population center, with more than 20 million people within 20 miles of the two-unit plant makes it impossible to have an effective safety and evacuation plan, Malatras said. The reactors generate about 25% of the power for New York City and Westchester County.


NY agency objects to relicensing Indian Point nuclear plant November 12, 2015. A New York agency has objected to relicensing the Indian Point nuclear plant on the Hudson River, saying it kills millions of fish larvae and sits near seismic faults with an earthquake threat to millions of people.

The Department of State said the plant is incompatible with the estuary’s ecology and safety of New York City 24 miles downstream. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is prohibited from relicensing the Indian Point reactors unless the U.S. commerce secretary overrides the objection on appeal, Secretary of State Cesar Perales wrote.

November 30, 2015 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, USA | Leave a comment

China’s authoritarian nuclear push meets community opposition

China’s authoritarian government, adept at corralling public opinion to get its way, can ram through its plans over the objections of people like Ms. Liu. But opponents say its closed, secretive political system is ill equipped to manage a rapid expansion of nuclear power, pointing to its struggle to prevent industrial disasters such as the chemical explosions in Tianjin in August that killed 173 people.


“The Chinese are beginning to wrestle with the same issues that Western countries were dealing with, concerning fear of the technology, transparency in decision making and trust of the authorities,”

Opponents of nuclear power in China maintain that the country can achieve its clean energy goals without a nuclear building spree, by investing heavily in improving solar and wind power and by upgrading the power grid so it can send electricity more efficiently across vast distances.

They point to the deadly explosions in Tianjin, where hazardous chemicals appear to have been stored improperly at a facility close to residential areas, as an example of how of lax regulation, graft and official obfuscation can undo the Chinese government’s promises to put safety first.

China’s Nuclear Vision Collides With Villagers’ Fears, NYT By CHRIS BUCKLEYNOV. 21, 2015“………..Hubin is one of dozens of sites across the country where officials have plans ready, awaiting further approval, to build atomic reactors over the next decade — an ambitious program to expand the use of nuclear energy that Beijing considers essential to weaning the Chinese economy from its reliance on coal-fired plants, which churn out air pollution and carbon dioxide.

Ask villagers here what they think of the proposed plant, though, and talk quickly turns to the Communist government’s dismal record of industrial accidents, as well as the 2011 nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan. Residents in Hubin will be resettled to new homes a few miles away, but many said that they would still feel threatened living so close to a nuclear station.

“It’s just not safe,” said Liu Shimin, a farmer in her 20s, nursing a baby outside her home near the banks of the Yahe River. “We’ll always be wondering, ‘What if there’s a big accident, like that one in Japan?’ ”

Such fears are on the rise in China as the nation embarks on a new phase of nuclear power construction that could make it the world’s biggest producer of nuclear energy by 2030. Continue reading

November 23, 2015 Posted by | China, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Call for Hong Gong to end nuclear energy imports when contract ends

Hong Kong should end nuclear energy imports after Daya Bay contract ends in 2034, Greenpeace says, South China Morning Post Group says ‘business  as usual’ approach not enough and urges greater use of renewables, 04 November, 2015, Ernest Kao  

Hong Kong should get rid of nuclear power in its energy mix as part of a long-term strategy not only to make the city safer but to help reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, an environmental group says.

By halting nuclear energy imports after the 20-year supply contract with the Daya Bay plant ends in 2034, along with reducing electricity use by one per cent each year and boosting renewable energy use to 10 per cent, Greenpeace calculated an emissions cut of 34 per cent could be achievable…..

November 4, 2015 Posted by | China, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,329 other followers