Poor countries could be paid to go nuclear
Poor countries could be paid to go nuclear * New Scientist 10 June 2009
THE prospect of paying poor countries to build nuclear power stations is back in view.
Draft text under negotiation at climate-change talks in Bonn, Germany, includes an option to make nuclear facilities eligible for funding under two schemes meant to help poorer countries develop low-carbon technologies: the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation.
Nuclear power was excluded from these schemes in the Kyoto protocol in 2001, after opposition from both European and some developing countries.
Poor countries could be paid to go nuclear – 10 June 2009 – New Scientist
USA: Nonviolent nuke protester gets gaol
facthaiwordpress.com 13 June 09 USA Non-violent protestor gets gaol Three of the six protesters arrested at the Dominion Resources North Anna Nuclear Power Plant were found guilty of trespassing today in the Louisa County Courthouse. The charges stem from conducting an alternative tour and sit-in at the Dominion Power Nuclear Information Center on August 7th………………………The planned new reactor at Lake Anna is one of the first of many nationwide being touted as a solution to global climate change. The protestors maintain that nuclear power is a false solution to the climate
change problem with costs and dangers that far outweigh any benefits. They cite enormous costs requiring massive government subsidies to construct the plant, dangers to the community caused by the lack of any viable plan to safely transport and store the toxic nuclear waste and project that construction of the plant could take ten years or more. The Louisa County protest is part of a series of international events calling for safe and renewable energy solutions.
Flashpoints where indigenous peoples are fighting to defend their lands
Flashpoints where indigenous peoples are fighting to defend their lands the Guardian 12 June 2009 Arizona
The Navajo nation is fighting uranium mining through the US courts. Radiation levels are 450 times the normal levels. Other uranium mines are opposed by indigenous groups in Australia, India, Canada, Niger and Botswana.
Flashpoints where indigenous peoples are fighting to defend their lands | Environment | The Guardian
PM – China shoots for world leadership on renewable energy
China shoots for world leadership on renewable energy PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORYPM – Friday, 12 June , 2009 18:32:00Reporter: Stephen McDonell”……………………..The Government in Beijing knows it has a massive problem with greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution in general, and in China there’s no solution like an engineering solution.
This country plans to build the biggest wind farms in world and it’s not stopping there.
China has already poured money into renewable energy and the Government is hinting at even further increases in investment in this area.
According to Zhang Xiaoqiang, the vice chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission, China will easily surpass its targets for wind and solar power by 2020; so it is now considering targets three times higher.
He told the Guardian newspaper that while the current goal for wind power over the next 11 years is 30 gigawatts the new target could be more like 100 gigawatts over the same time period.
He also said that the total installed capacity for solar energy would be at least three times the original target of three gigawatts.
China could have a massive one fifth of all its energy from renewable sources by 2020.
World’s biggest open pit operation could be a reality – Part Two — Australian Journal of Mining
World’s biggest open pit operation could be a reality – Part Two AJM By Paula Wallace Jun 11, 2009“……………….The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) has criticised the proposal on the basis that BHP’s Draft EIS has not “addressed feasible alternatives as project options to provide a basis for informed public consideration and input and to facilitate Government decisions and conditions in the public interest.”
The ACF’s David Noonan said the Draft EIS should include options where Olympic Dam can trade as a copper venture with all radioactive materials retained on-site; that all copper concentrate should be processed on-site; that mine tailings be disposed of in the pit for 10,000 years as per the Ranger mine agreement; that the plan include use of renewable energy; and that different sites are offered for location of a desalination plant.
Noonan also said that BHP has applied for State Government approval to extract up to one million tonnes of copper product a year, even though the EIS only examines an expansion of up to 750,000 tonnes a year.
“Radioactive waste from the mine, damage to the marine environment from desalination and greenhouse pollution from additional energy demand may all be one third worse than envisaged by the company’s EIS.
“BHP plans to line only 15 per cent of the proposed 44 square kilometre tailings facility that will be up to 65 metres high…This could be leaking 8 million litres of liquid waste by 2020,” he said…………………………The ACF’s concerns around the miner’s plan to send uranium containing copper concentrate overseas are numerous.
“The uranium quarry plan would make BHP and South Australia complicit in selling uranium to nuclear weapons states and in unresolved radioactive waste management problems overseas and at the mine site.”
This raises questions generally about the scope of a uranium mining company’s responsibilities in the nuclear fuel cycle and its interpretation of corporate sustainability………………………Whilst some would consider it to be part of responsible management of uranium and all its by-products, The Uranium Stewardship Principles also don’t make it clear whether mining companies should be involved in the disposal of downstream radioactive waste……………………Whilst mining companies to date have not been expected to take responsibility for the downstream emissions or impacts of the deployment of their products, the recent public concern over coal powered energy may prompt a re-thinking of this issue in the context of the mining industry’s ‘social licence to operate’.
-
Archives
- January 2026 (118)
- 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
Poor countries could be paid to go nuclear * New Scientist 10 June 2009

