nuclear-news

The Bombs Keep Dropping

The Bombs Keep Dropping
ARTVOICE by Geoff Kelly & Louis Ricciuti 6 aUGUST 09
Radioactive wastes leak from containment structure, but no worries—the water’s fine

The 64th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—August 6 and 9, 1945—will scarcely be marked in Western New York: A moment of silence was observed at the Japanese gardens in Delaware Park on Wednesday evening, followed by a screening of Hiroshima-Nagasaki August 1945, a short film by Erik Barnouw made from footage shot by a Japanese film crew immediately after the bombings. But that’s about it.

We have reason to make more of it:.The chemical and metallurgical industries in Niagara Falls were instrumental to the Manhattan Project, which created the first atomic bombs. This region was at one time the free world’s leading producer of uranium metal for use in weapons and reactors—and, it follows, the leading producer of the deadly wastes that attend the refinement process. Avast amount of that waste was dumped cavalierly on a 12-square-mile federal reserve

Western New Yorkers, and especially residents of Niagara County, live with their own legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And here’s news with which to mark this year’s anniversary: Two weeks ago, Dr. Joseph Gardella, a chemist at the University at Buffalo, announced that the Corps’ monitoring reports indicate that the containment structure is leaking uranium into the groundwater.

The Bombs Keep Dropping

August 6, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1 | Leave a comment

Nuclear energy isn’t the answer

Nuclear energy isn’t the answer
Mountain Home News August 5, 2009
Nuclear energy sounds like the answer to this country’s energy problems, but it isn’t.For decades, nuclear power has been peddled as being an efficient and inexpensive energy. In the ’50s, nuclear advocates loudly promised the world that atomic power would provide electricity “too cheap to meter.” That promise dissolved with the reality of reactor construction costs in the 1970s and 1980s.But the price to consumers isn’t limited to just the cost of the power usage that is listed on your monthly electricity bill. It goes way beyond that. Nuclear power is not cheap. Since the very beginning the government has been heaping subsidies, which come from our tax dollars, into the building and running of nuclear plants. But these cash payments and tax breaks are not the most valuable subsidies that they receive. The most important subsidies that the investors and owners can receive come from shifting the risks onto the taxpayers or the surrounding area’s population.A lot of the risks to the investors are financial, such as the unexpected costs associated with construction, or the risk of defaulting on the costs of loans or the debts that can occur from construction delays or administrative failure and error…………………….

Since its inception, the nuclear industry has benefited greatly from government programs that shift the key risks of the nuclear fuel cycle away from investors and onto taxpayers. All operating nuclear power plants in the U.S. were built with very large public subsidies (our tax dollars again). These include large subsidies for research and development, for plant construction, for uranium enrichment, and for waste management. Since the very beginning, the nuclear industry has been supported by the public monies given to them from our government (our tax dollars), as well as monumental and lucrative tax write-offs.

Mountain Home News: Story: Nuclear energy isn’t answer

August 6, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1 | Leave a comment

Taxpayers at Risk – Expansion of Nuclear Loan Guarantees Could Cost Billions

Taxpayers at Risk – Expansion of Nuclear Loan Guarantees Could Cost Billions WASHINGTON,
Aug. 5 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Several new analyses confirm that, after over half a century of operation, nuclear power remains one of the most capital intensive, high-risk energy industries…………..

Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS) opposes the expansion of loan guarantees for new reactors:

• Earlier this summer, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee adopted S. 949, the 21st Century Energy and Technology Deployment Act, as part of a suite of bills that has now been combined into a larger energy bill, the American Clean Energy Leadership Act of 2009 (ACELA). The main goals of the Clean Energy Technology Deployment provisions, now Title I of ACELA, are to make changes to the existing DOE loan guarantee program and create an independent entity within DOE, known as the Clean Energy Deployment Administration (CEDA), to distribute credit support to the energy industry.
• The Department of Energy’s Loan Guarantee Program already has $18.5 billion authorized for Treasury-backed loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates a 50 percent default rate on these loan guarantees. However, this could be just the beginning of billions more in risk as the nuclear industry has already submitted more than $120 billion in loan guarantee requests.

While TCS takes no position on whether or not nuclear power should be part of the nation’s energy future, we strongly believe it should not continue to be subsidized by taxpayers.

Editorial Board/Op-Ed Briefer: Taxpayers at Risk – Expansion of Nuclear Loan Guarantees Could Cost Billions

August 6, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1 | Leave a comment

Atomic agency urged to examine Burma nuclear claims

Atomic agency urged to examine Burma nuclear claimsAnne Davies, Washington
The Age August 5, 2009
US NON-proliferation experts have called on the International Atomic Energy Agency to seek clarification from the Burmese Government over its nuclear program following a report in The Age that quoted defectors claiming there was a secret military nuclear program.The Age report, based on interviews by Professor Desmond Ball of the Australian National University and journalist Phil Thornton with defectors from Burma, revealed that it was building a secret nuclear reactor, with North Korea’s assistance, at Nuang Laing, close to Mandalay………………………..

Russia is said to have agreed in 2007 to give the Burmese a small civilian light-water reactor, which would be subject to IAEA inspections, although the status of the project is disputed.

David Albright, the head of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, which monitors nuclear proliferation, pointed to visits to Burma by executives from the North Korean company Namchongang Trading Corporation, which is under sanctions for its role in trading nuclear technology.

Atomic agency urged to examine Burma nuclear claims

August 6, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1 | Leave a comment