Anti-science legislators leading Utah down a rabbit hole – Salt Lake Tribune
Anti-science legislators leading Utah down a rabbit hole
Sixty years after the first nuclear power plant began operation, scientific controversies about safety are at best still unresolved. Nuclear power proponents choose to ignore genuine handicaps for more nuclear power: the public-health consequence of ongoing release of radioactivity from all phases of the nuclear fuel cycle, huge water requirements, the potential for accidents and their liabilities, the unsolvable problem with waste storage, skyrocketing cost estimates of construction, maintenance and eventual dismantling of the plants………
………………. We have been led into the abyss of a dark economic future by breathtaking greed and conflicts of interest in the financial world and our own ignorance. Consider that lesson unlearned. We have elected to Utah’s Capitol Hill a quorum of science antagonists who are eager to lead us into an ecological abyss, exploiting our ignorance and wearing their own lack of scientific background and conflicts of interest as badges of honor…………………..
Anti-science legislators leading Utah down a rabbit hole – Salt Lake Tribune
Is nuclear finally off the table?
Is nuclear finally off the table? Mother Nature Network Mar 12 2009
It’s not looking good for the nuclear industry. Last month, the $50 billion earmark for nuclear energy was removed from Obama’s stimulus bill. And today Yucca Mountain, the problematic nuclear waste containment facility that was supposed to finally legitimate the viability of nuclear energy, just had its plug pulled by Steven Chu, head of the D.O.E.Chu tried to assure jittery senators in the Senate Budget Committee that “Nuclear is going to be part of our energy future,” but many were skeptical. A quiet and growing consensus seems to be emerging among energy experts, cleantech investors and the general public that nuclear just does not seem to add up.When asked about the future of nuclear energy this week at the ECO:nomics summit, Matt C. Rogers stated that nuclear was taken off the table because it didn’t meet the key criterion of the stimulus bill — to get projects underway and create jobs in the next 18 months. That doesn’t mean there won’t be appropriations for nuclear in the upcoming energy bill, but the focus will likely be on creating “next-gen” nuclear which by some estimates is at least 10 years away from deployment.Why the slowdown? I wish I could say it is because nuclear’s many disconcerting ramifications (both political and environmental) have suddenly become clear. But in reality, the real reason is financial………………………..we only have a very small window to solve global warming. Why would we invest our precious time and money on ANY technology (especially one that has so many unsolved problems) knowing that it relies upon a finite resource — coal, gas, oil, uranium — when you could invest in a technology that makes use of fee, infinite and safe resources — solar, wind, geothermal.
Is nuclear finally off the table? | MNN – Mother Nature Network
Alaska Natives protest uranium exploration on Iditarod Trail
Alaska Natives protest uranium exploration on Iditarod Trail Atlantic Free Press by Brenda Norrell Saturday, 14 March 2009 A Coalition of Alaskan Indigenous Peoples, Alaskan citizens, students and community organizations are demonstrating support for students protesting Uranium activity in the traditional cultural use areas near the Arctic Inupiat community of Elim. Alaskans from various organizations and communities gathered at the ceremonial start of the Iditarod on March 7th, downtown Anchorage, to demonstrate support for the students and community of Elim. Students in Elim will be protesting uranium as dog mushers race through the Elim checkpoint 123 miles from Nome.
Funny Murray, an Inupiaq Para-professional in Elim, says that the students are leading the effort to raise awareness on the uranium’s destructive impacts to the environment, ecosystem and people. “The Elim Students Against Uranium (ESAU) researched how uranium development can cause damage to the health of the environment, plants, animals and people. They (ESAU) are speaking up for environmental justice here in Elim, the Bering Sea and the Arctic.”
Carl Wassilie, a Yup’ik biologist for Alaska’s Big Village Network, says that any industrial activity like uranium exploration can have profound impacts on the Earth’s ecosystem, especially for people who continue to hunt and gather from the land and the water. One of the by-products of pulling uranium out of the Earth is radon gas, which can travel thousands of miles with a slight breeze and ‘falls out’ on the surface of the Earth into water systems, plants and animals. “Basically, people, birds, fish, caribou, moose and all animals living hundreds of miles away can get chronic and long-term exposure to radioactive fall-out that cause an array of health problems and cancer; especially vulnerable are elders, pregnant women and young children.”
Alaska Natives protest uranium exploration on Iditarod Trail
Don’t reclassify nuclear power as ‘renewable’
Don’t reclassify nuclear power as ‘renewable’ Arizona Daily Star Tucson, Arizona 03.14.2009
An effort in the Legislature that would redefine “renewable energy” to include nuclear power could do irreparable harm to the state’s budding clean-energy industries and deserves to be thrown onto the trash heap of non-recyclable ideas.House Bill 2623, sponsored by Lucy Mason, R-Prescott, has several problems. First, it would include nuclear and hydroelectric power (dams) in the definition of “renewable energy,” which is generally considered power derived from natural sources — such as the sun, wind, biomass, tides and geothermal heat……………………………….Now that the bill is on hold, we hope this is the last we hear of this misguided effort to label nuclear power as a renewable energy source…………………………….No other state defines nuclear power as a renewable energy source. Similar efforts to do so in South Carolina and Utah have failed. The reasons should be patently obvious.……………………….. its environmental impact and hazardous-waste output make it much less ecologically friendly than solar or wind power.
-
Archives
- January 2026 (8)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

