NuGen Told By ASA Not To Repeat Lie…But This Does Not Go Far Enough
Nuke Liar Awards
NuGen Told By the Advertising Standards Authority Not to Repeat Lie
Bigging Up Moorside…..
– But This Does Not Go Far Enough!
Letter sent today to Tim Farron MP
Dear Tim,
I would be very grateful if you could ask Secretary of State Amber Rudd
the following on Radiation Free Lakeland’s behalf.
NuGen Advertorial
In April the proposers of three AP1000 reactors on greenfields and
floodplain near Sellafield, put out an advertorial in all Cumbrian
newspapers. This double page advertorial stated that the proposed
Moorside nuclear power station would provide about “7% of the UK’s energy
requirement”
Energy v Electricity
NuGen had printed the word ‘energy’ meaning ‘electricity’ The station
would actually be predicted to only supply less than 2% of future UK
energy demand (see below).
ASA Complaint
We wrote to the ASA pointing out that NuGen’s advertorial was out by a
factor of X 3.5…
View original post 401 more words
The archaic nature of baseload power–or why electricity will become like long-distance.
The old grid, beholden to massive, polluting baseload power plants, is being replaced by a nimbler, high-tech 21st century system oriented toward variable renewable energy.
There are no shortage of skeptics out there, even some among environmentalists and clean energy advocates, who are unconvinced that renewable energy can ever be the dominant–perhaps even sole–source of electricity generation.
The reasons for this skepticism vary. Some, for example, argue that the land needs for sufficient generation of wind and solar power are too great. This turns out to be an incredibly lame argument, but that’s the subject of a different article.
More frequent are the arguments that “baseload” power–large power plants that tend to run 24/7–are necessary to ensure reliable electricity and that the variable nature of some renewables–solar and wind–can’t provide that reliability. Then there’s the notion that the electrical grid can only accommodate a certain level of renewables, around 30-40%…
View original post 2,476 more words
Climate: West may be in permanent drought by 2060s
Is western drought the new climate normal?
New study quantifies global warming effect on California drought
Staff Report
FRISCO — Researchers say there’s new evidence that global warming will push the western U.S. into the driest conditions in at least the past 1,000 years, as higher temperatures exacerbate drought condition in the region.
The new study by scientists with Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and Cornell University focused on the current California drought, showing that warmer temps drive moisture from plants and soil into the air. Warmer temps likely worsened the California drought by 25 percent, the scientists concluded in their paper, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.
View original post 440 more words
Striking Targets:
Amidst the noise of the day-to-day debates, we have lost sight of the simple logic of the advice coming from the world’s top climate scientists. Despite the uncertainties in the details, the science carries one underlying message, from which we can draw only one rational conclusion.
It is time to declare a global emergency and mobilise all our available resources, political will and human ingenuity towards one task – reducing the risk of catastrophic climate change to a safe level.
The momentum in the climate system is now so great that the world will, before long, accept that the threat is of this magnitude.
It will recognise that, despite the remaining uncertainties, we cannot afford to risk the collapse of the global economy and civilisation. Thus society will at last strike
up an appropriate response – one that recognises the science and the true scale
of the risk.
When this…
View original post 110 more words
India home to the world’s 1st airport that runs entirely on solar power #Auspol
If you thought that globetrotting solar-powered airplane was impressive, wait until you see the solar airport that India just finished building. After a great deal of development and construction, the country’s Cochin International Airport in the southern state of Kerala is now officially the world’s first airport thats runs exclusively on solar power.
The facility is now reportedly “absolutely power neutral” — meaning it creates just as much energy as it consumes. That’s a pretty impressive feat when you consider that Cochin International is one of the biggest airports in India, with over 1,500,000 square feet of terminal space alone.
To generate enough juice to run the facility, the airport had to build its own 12 MWp solar power plant onsite, which is comprised of more than 46,000 solar panels splayed across 45 acres of land. This array is expected to produce somewhere around “50,000 to 60,000 units of electricity…
View original post 28 more words
TEN CLEAR INDICATORS OUR CLIMATE IS CHANGING #Auspol #ClimateChange
How do we know our climate is changing permanently, rather than just going through a normal period of flux? Let’s look at 10 major changes scientists have seen in our climate system to help set the record straight.Few global trends have been as controversial as climate change and the Earth’s warming. The Earth has gone through many shifts in cooling and warming driven by natural factors like the sun’s energy or variations in its orbit, but the trend scientists have seen over the past 50 years is unmistakable.
Let’s take a closer look: globally, average surface temperatures increased 1.1—1.6 degrees Fahrenheit (0.6—0.9 degrees Celsius) between 1906 and 2005. However, it’s the rate of temperature change that’s especially troubling to scientists; temperatures have risen nearly twice as fast in the last 50 years alone.
What other ways has our climate system changed in the last century? How do we really know…
View original post 312 more words
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission called upon to disclose study on nuclear disaster
Groups want full nuclear report released http://www.durhamregion.com/news-story/5804511-groups-want-full-nuclear-report-released/ By The Canadian Press, 19 Aug 15, OTTAWA – Environmental groups are urging the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to release a study on nuclear disaster scenarios that they say was suppressed.
The commission released a study last year looking at health and environmental consequences of accident scenarios, following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, but the groups say it wasn’t released in full.
Greenpeace, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and other environmental organizations say emails obtained through access to information requests show management at the nuclear commission censored the original draft.
They say the original study analyzed the impacts of a Fukushima-scale accident at the Darlington nuclear plant, 70 kilometres east of Toronto, but that wasn’t included in the version released to the public.
The groups cite an email from the director of the Darlington regulatory program division that says it would become a “focal point of any licence renewal” and would be used “malevolently” in a public hearing.
The nuclear commission is holding a hearing today in Ottawa on Ontario Power Generation’s application to extend the operating life of four aging Darlington reactors and the environmental groups want the Fukushima-scale analysis released before public submissions are due next month.
“The CNSC has betrayed the public trust by concealing a study revealing risks to Toronto,” said Shawn-Patrick Stensil, a senior energy analyst with Greenpeace. “The study should be released so these hazards can be addressed transparently and appropriate emergency plans put in place.”
Truly independent research on ionising radiation – Concerted Uranium Research Europe (CURE)
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a Third Nuclear Atrocity: the Corruption of Science, CounterPunch, by CHRIS BUSBY 19 AUG 15 “………Finally, someone is trying to get to the truth of the matter
In case you think this is all mad stuff, there does at last seem to be some measure of concern evolving in this area of internal radiation, though no one in The Lancet articles mentions it. The European Union radiation research organization MELODI has finally moved into action, led by the French radiation protection agency IRSN.
The matter was raised (by me) at the inaugural MELODI conference in Paris in 2011, but nothing seemed to develop. I said that there are likely to be dose estimation problems associated with internal exposure to nuclides which bind to DNA, and particularly Uranium; that this potentially falsified the Hiroshima risk model.
A hugely expensive European research project has now been proposed. It is CURE: Concerted Uranium Research Europe. In the report launching this development in March 2015 the authors wrote: a large scale integrated collaborative project will be proposed to improve the characterization of the biological and health effects associated with uranium internal contamination in Europe.
In the future, it might be envisaged to extend collaborations with other countries outside the European Union, to apply the proposed approach to other internal emitters and other exposure situations of internal contamination, and to open the reflections to other disciplines interested in the effects of internal contaminations by radionuclides.
In the future, Hiroshima should not be remembered not just for the destruction of its inhabitants, but also for being the flag for the epidemiological cover-up of the biggest public health scandal in human history, whose victims number hundreds of millions – in cancer deaths and miscarriages, infant deaths, loss of fertility and the introduction of genomic instability to all creatures on Earth.
Let us pray that it will not be allowed to sanction the final nuclear exchange, on the mistaken prediction that such an event will be winnable.http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/19/after-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-a-third-nuclear-atrocity-the-corruption-of-science/
This article was originally published by RT, and is reproduced by kind permission of the author.
Dr Chris Busby is the Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Riskand the author of Uranium and Health – The Health Effects of Exposure to Uranium and Uranium Weapons Fallout (Documents of the ECRR 2010 No 2, Brussels, 2010). For details and current CV see chrisbusbyexposed.org. For accounts of his work see greenaudit.org, llrc.org and nuclearjustice.org. http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/19/after-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-a-third-nuclear-atrocity-the-corruption-of-science/
Act now: tell the NRC it must reject efforts by nuclear fanatics to weaken radiation standards!
Nuclear Informationa and Resource Service, 19 Aug 15, In February, a group of pro-nuclear fanatics—there is really no other way to describe them—submitted three petitions for rulemaking to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
These three petitions would turn the entire basis for radiation protection standards on its head: they argue that the “Linear No-Threshold” (LNT) radiation model used by the NRC, EPA, and most modern societies should be replaced by a “hormesis” model.
But this is no academic debate about obscure terminology. This is a direct assault on the NRC’s fundamental regulations and on the scientific community itself. If adopted, the hormesis model would mean, in the real world, more death and disease from even the normal operations of nuclear power facilities.
Tell the NRC to reject the hormesis model and instead to strengthen radiation standards.
Here’s the basic difference between the two models: the LNT model, used by the National Academies of Sciences and all government agencies, acknowledges that there is no such thing as a “safe” level of radiation exposure. All exposure carries some risk of cancer or other disease, and that risk rises with the amount of exposure. The “hormesis” model, on the other hand, asserts—with little to no scientific backing—that exposure to very low levels of radiation can actually be beneficial to people, and that there is no concern about exposures until they reach very high levels.
If implemented, the hormesis model would result in needless death and misery. The concept of ALARA (a requirement that nuclear operators reduce exposures “as low as reasonably achievable”) would be tossed out the window. Emergency Planning Zones would be significantly reduced or abolished entirely. Instead of being forced to spend money to limit radiation releases, nuclear utilities could pocket greater profits.
In addition, adoption of the hormesis model by the NRC would throw the entire government’s radiation protection rules into disarray, since other agencies, like the EPA, also rely on the LNT model.
The entire concept is unconscionable and the NRC knows it. It never should have accepted these petitions for comment; the agency should have just thrown them in the trash heap where they came from.
Tell the NRC now to reject the hormesis model and instead to strengthen radiation standards.
The sponsors of these petitions are the radiological equivalent of climate deniers–they either refuse to believe the scientific evidence, or deliberately ignore it to promote the interests of an industry. I wrote about this phenomonen last week on GreenWorld. And, like the climate deniers, the radiation deniers must be defeated: for the sake of our health and our lives, our homes, our children and generations to come, our planet.
The sample comments provided include a couple of quotes, one from the chair of the NAS’ BEIR VII committee, which endorsed the LNT approach and one from the former head of the EPA’s radiation section, which states that the EPA isn’t planning to change its rules anytime soon. As always, you are free to edit the sample comments to use your own language and address your own concerns.
If anything, as we’ve stated in previous alerts on other radiation issues, the NRC’s radiation standards need to be strengthened. As we’ve learned in recent years, women and children, especially girls, are more susceptible to radiation than men. Yet the standards don’t reflect that. Indeed, the NRC’s rules still rely on the “standard man” approach, which allows greater exposures to the most vulnerable in our population.
The NRC needs to hear from all of us now that we simply will not accept the efforts of a few pro-nuclear fanatics to benefit the nuclear power industry at the expense of public health and safety. So please spread this message widely. You can find and share this Alert from this page. You can share theAction Page using the icons on its top right–but please do so before you send in your comments.
Finally, a gentle reminder that NIRS campaigns–like our ongoing efforts to expose the real effects of radiation and prevent any weakening of radiation protection standards–cost money. We rely on our supporters–you–to help pay for these campaigns. Please consider donating here now or after you send in your comments, or by PayPal here, or by check to NIRS, 6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912. You can also call in a donation to NIRS at 301-270-6477. Ask for Denise Jakobsberg.
Michael Mariotte
President
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
please don’t forget to sign and share our Don’t Nuke the Climate statement. Thousands already have, we hope many thousands more will do so before December.
Stay Informed:
NIRS on the web: http://www.nirs.org
GreenWorld: (NIRS’ daily blog chronicling nuclear issues and the transition to a nuclear-free, carbon-free energy system)http://www.safeenergy.org
NIRS on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nuclear-Information-and-Resource-Service/26490791479?sk=wall&filter=12
http://www.facebook.com/nonukesnirs
http://www.facebook.com/groups/nukefreeclimatefreemarch/
NIRS on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/nirsnet
NIRS on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/nirsnet
International Research Team studies Fukushima contaminants in seafloor sediments
Examining the fate of Fukushima contaminants, Science Daily,
Fraction of buried, ocean sediment uncovered by typhoons, carried offshore by currents August 18, 2015, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
- Summary:
- An international research team reports results of a three-year study of sediment samples collected offshore from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. The research aids in understanding what happens to Fukushima contaminants after they are buried on the seafloor off coastal Japan. Scientists found that a small fraction of contaminated seafloor sediments off Fukushima are moved offshore by typhoons that resuspend radioactive particles in the water.
- An international research team reports results of a three-year study of sediment samples collected offshore from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in a new paper published August 18, 2015, in the American Chemical Society’s journal,Environmental Science and Technology.
The research aids in understanding what happens to Fukushima contaminants after they are buried on the seafloor off coastal Japan.
Led by Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist and marine chemist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), the team found that a small fraction of contaminated seafloor sediments off Fukushima are moved offshore by typhoons that resuspend radioactive particles in the water, which then travel laterally with southeasterly currents into the Pacific Ocean.
“Cesium is one of the dominant radionuclides that was released in unprecedented amounts with contaminated water from Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant following the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami,” says Buesseler. “A little over 99 percent of it moved with the water offshore, but a very small fraction–less than one percent–ended up on the sea floor as buried sediment.”
“We’ve been looking at the fate of that buried sediment on the continental shelf and tracking how much of that contaminated sediment gets offshore through re-suspension from the ocean bottom,” he adds.
The research team, which included colleagues from the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology and the Japan Atomic Energy Agency, analyzed three years’ worth of data collected from time-series sediment traps……….
-
“The total transport is small, though it is readily detectable. One percent or less of the contaminated sediment that’s moving offshore every year means things aren’t going to change very fast,” Buesseler says. “What’s buried is going to stay buried for decades to come. And that’s what may be contributing to elevated levels of cesium in fish–particularly bottom-dwelling fish off Japan.”
While there were hundreds of different radionuclides released from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant during the disaster, after the initial decay of contaminants with half lives (the time it takes for one half of a given amount of radionuclide to decay) less than days to weeks, much of the attention has remained focused on cesium-137 and-134– two of the more abundant contaminants. Cesium-134 has a half-life of a little over two years, and so any found in the ocean could come only from the reactors at Fukushima. Cesium-137 has a half-life of roughly 30 years and is also known to have entered the Pacific as a result of aboveground nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s and ’60s, providing a benchmark against which to measure any additional releases from the reactors.
In October, Buesseler and the research team will return to Japan to redeploy more sediment traps. The continued study will help estimate how long it takes to decrease the level of radiocesium in seafloor sediments near the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
Story Source:
The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150818112431.htm
Uranium: a genetic poison that targets DNA
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a Third Nuclear Atrocity: the Corruption of Science, CounterPunch, by CHRIS BUSBY 19 AUG 15 “……… The origin was the “black rain” which contained Uranium-235, Uranium-238 and particularly Uranium-234, which is the missing exposure, and is probably responsible for most of the cancer effects in all the survivors. We know that the Uranium was there because it was measured by Japanese scientists in 1983.
A recently declassified US document tabulates the enormous U-234 content of the enriched Uranium used in the bombs, codename: Oralloy. The Uranium nanoparticles in the Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) black rain were available for inhalation by all the exposure groups in the ruins of Hiroshima for years after the bomb.
All the bombs were made of Uranium, about 1 ton per Megaton yield. For all those tests in Nevada, the Marshall Islands, Kazakhstan, Christmas Island, the results were the same: down came the nanoparticles to be inhaled by anyone nearby and distant.
Why does this matter? New research has been carried out on Uranium. We find that Uranium targets DNA through chemical affinity. This causes terrible and anomalous genetic damage, out or all proportion to its “dose” as calculated by ICRP. Other fallout components also bind chemically to DNA, e.g. Strontium-90, Barium-140.
Those exposed: Uranium miners, Gulf Veterans, Test Veterans, DU civilians, Nuclear Uranium workers, Nuclear Site downwinders, all suffer chromosome damage, cancer, leukemia, heart disease, the works. All this is published, as are the results of laboratory and theoretical studies showing mechanisms. But in the Lancet: nothing.
S L Simon and A Bouville who wrote the article on the health effects of the nuclear testing did not even mention Uranium there, nor in their epic 2010 study of the Marshall Islands exposures. The Nevada site data that they used for their baseline calculations ignored it totally.
In 2012, I made a presentation for the Marshall Islanders at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, attacking the Simon et al analysis. In their Lancet nuclear test article, Simon and Bouville major on Iodine effects. So let’s look at those.
Scientific evidence from Fukushima: massive excess of thyroid cancers
In Fukushima Prefecture, surveys have confirmed 103 thyroid cancers in 380,000 18-year olds (25 or so are still being checked out). The Lancet article by Wakeford et al. presents an excess Relative Risk culled from the Hiroshima studies of 0.6 per Sievert (Fig 2 p 473). In the very same issue, the maximum thyroid dose was given as 18mSv with the median dose as 0.67mSv.
So in the two years of screening, if everyone screened got the maximum thyroid dose of 18mSv we should expect an increase of 0.018 x 0.6 = 0.011, a 1.1% increase in the background rate. This background is about 1 per 100,000 per year or 7.6 in two years in 380,000. So the radiation should increase this to 7.7 cases (i.e. one extra case in 10 years).
There are 103, that is 95 more cases than expected, an error in the ICRP model of 95/0.14 = 678-fold. That is, there are 678 times more thyroid cancers than the Hiroshima-based ICRP model predicts.
This calculation is based on what was written in The Lancet – but nobody made the calculation. This on its own should show the authorities (and the public) that the game is up. But instead of doing the simple calculation, another article in The Lancet, written by Geoff Watts, praises the work of those at Fukushima Medical University, who are busy telling everyone that the increases in thyroid cancer cannot be caused by the radiation.
In other words, once again, the predictions from Hiroshima are believed, rather than the evidence in front of their eyes. It’s a kind of mass hypnosis (or maybe not)…….” http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/19/after-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-a-third-nuclear-atrocity-the-corruption-of-science/
Pro nuclear search for making ionising radiation look good
The Israeli scientist who’s poisoning herself to find a vaccine for nuclear radiation http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/israeli-scientist-invents-vaccine-against-nuclear-radiation–but-is-she-just-poisoning-herself-10462040.html A retired medical professor thinks she has discovered a method for vaccinating against the effects of a nuclear fallout – and has been slowly poisoning herself in a bid to prove it.
Professor Brenda Laster’s theory, so far tested only on herself and mice, is that the body can be taught to react to radiation in the same way that traditional vaccinations can teach it to react to diseases.
Studies from nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima have shown that high doses of radiation cause the body to produce large and ultimately fatal quantities of hydrogen peroxide.
But experts say that less research has been done on lower doses of radiation – if, for instance, a person was an intermediate distance from the fallout itself.
Before Professor Laster retired, she was the director of the radiology lab at the Department of Nuclear Engineering at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel.
And she believes that delivering the body small doses of hydrogen peroxide, over a long period of time, would teach it how to respond in the event of a much larger attack.
Speaking to the Times of Israel, she said she had documented “an immune response” in mice three weeks after they began drinking water laced with hydrogen peroxide.
She is so confident in her theory that she started taking the solution too, up to five drops a day, “the day [we started] giving it to the mice”.
She said: “No one understands this concept. No one makes the connection between radiation viruses and bacteria and so on. People just don’t do it.”
According to the university where she taught, Professor Laster’s laboratory was set up to investigate “the biological effects of exposure to low-dose ionising radiation” in 2010 with a $500,000 donation.
That funding has now run out, however, and Professor Laster needs more money if she is going to get more mice to progress with her research.
But not everyone thinks the avenue of investigation is worthwhile. Dr Zvi Symon, the director of the Sheba Medical Center’s radiation department, told The Times the theory “sounds wild”.
“Exposing people to small amounts of radiation or to free radicals is a wild and actually dangerous, probably, idea,” he said. “I don’t think it has any scientific merit.”
Science corrupted in the cause of promoting the nuclear industry
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a Third Nuclear Atrocity: the Corruption of Science, CounterPunch, by CHRIS BUSBY 19 AUG 15 On the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, articles are appearing everywhere discussing the historical, philosophical, scientific, public health and social meaning of this event (I almost wrote ‘war crime’).
The bombings can be extrapolated onward in time through the atmospheric testing fallout and Chernobyl, to the more recent contamination in Japan after Fukushima.
Today, the analysis of the health risks from the Japanese A-Bombs is being cleverly twisted to provide a rationale for the development of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not just some historical tableaux that we can weep crocodile tears over, and discuss as socio-historic phenomena.
They are here today, present as ghosts, in all the manipulations and devious calculations made by the international radiation risk agencies and nuclear-industry scientists giving results that continue to permit the release into the environment of the same deadly substances that emerged for the first time in 1945.
Abusing Hiroshima to deny nuclear bomb health damage
I am currently presenting a case for the British Atomic Test veterans in the Royal Courts of Justice in London. The case pivots on the faulty radiation and health risk model that is based on the Lifespan Study of the Japanese A-Bomb survivors. Continue reading
Why is USA ignoring Israel’s nuclear arsenal?
Why is Israel’s nuclear arsenal not mentioned in Iran deal debate?, McClatchy DC
Israel has as many as 100 nuclear warheads and systems to deliver them
But U.S. officials don’t mention them under a 1969 agreement
Iranian nukes would challenge Israel’s unique Middle East position
BY JONATHAN S. LANDAY jlanday@mcclatchydc.com WASHINGTON , 19 Aug 15,
There’s one major issue that President Barack Obama, his supporters and his critics assiduously have avoided as they battle over the deal designed to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons: Israel’s own nuclear arsenal.
An open secret for decades, the Israeli stockpile is estimated at some 80-100 warheads, though Israel refuses to confirm or deny its existence under a policy of deliberate ambiguity. The arsenal was developed as the ultimate guarantor of the Jewish state’s survival against threats from its hostile neighborhood.
Yet as the sides joust over the Iran deal’s impact on Israel’s security, Obama has been silent on the Israeli arsenal as a potential deterrent against Iranian cheating on the accord. Opponents, led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, haven’t touched the issue, either. And it hasn’t figured in the public hearings that Congress is holding as part of a 60-day review that will culminate in a Republican-led bid to kill the Iran accord next month.
To some experts, the fierce debate over whether the Iran deal endangers Israel or makes it safer will be incomplete and misleading as long as it skirts the Middle East’s only nuclear arms stockpile………http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article31470917.html
Islamic leaders call on the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims to embrace climate change action
Can an Islamic climate change declaration inspire 1.6B Muslims? Lisa Friedman, E&E reporter ClimateWire: Monday, August 17, 2015 Islamic leaders from around the globe tomorrow will unveil a declaration calling on the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims to embrace climate change action as part of their religious duty.
Activists gathering in Istanbul for the event said that just as Pope Francis declared climate change essential to the Catholic faith, they hope Islamic religious scholars can inspire Muslim communities to make the issue a priority.
“Islam is very strong on environmental protection,” said Wael Hmaidan, director of Climate Action Network International, who is helping to organize the declaration.
“From the Quran to the hadiths [sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad], it really says it is a human responsibility … that we are tasked with protecting creation and it is part of our duties as Muslims,” he said.
Leaders will be carrying that message when the Islamic Climate Change Declaration is formally unveiled at the conclusion of a two-day symposium organized by Islamic Relief Worldwide, the Islamic Foundation for Ecology and Environmental Sciences, and GreenFaith.
In addition to emphasizing the Quran’s teachings on environmental protection and the role that Islam can play in addressing climate change, it is expected to call on wealthy countries to “drastically” reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help vulnerable nations grapple with climate impacts.
A call for a fossil fuel-free world
Issuing the declaration will be religious and political leaders from throughout the Muslim world, including professor Din Syamsuddin, president of the Indonesian Council of Ulama; Sheikh Shaban Ramadhan Mubajje, grand mufti of Uganda; and Mohammed El Arwadi, a representative of the grand mufti of Lebanon……..
As home to the world’s second-largest religion, Hmaidan said, Muslim countries and Islamic leadership can play a unique role in shaping the global climate accord that countries hope to sign in Paris in December. Currently, he said, climate change is only sporadically raised in Islamic discussions, usually as part of a particular initiative. He called the symposium and declaration a “first step” in substantively engaging communities during Friday prayer and other occasions.
“To change everything, you need everyone,” he said. “Every key community in the world needs to really start putting climate change on the agenda.” http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060023527
1 This Month.
Let’s keep radioactive waste away from our river!
Nuclear Power? -Never again
(Switzerland –https://www.greenpeace.ch/de/handeln/atomkraft-nie-wieder/+)
PETITION – Close Down the Monticello Nuclear Reactor on the Mississippi River!
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (223)
- 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)
- January 2025 (250)
-
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
nuclear-news 