Fake story from Wall Street Journal claiming environmentalists support nuclear power
So are there prominent climate scientists and self-described environmentalists advocating for nuclear power? To be sure. But their stance doesn’t necessarily define the larger movement of low-carbon, renewable energy advocates who hold a decidedly different position.
WSJ Fakes a Green Shift Toward Nuclear Power http://fair.org/home/wsj-fakes-a-green-shift-toward-nuclear-power/ By Miranda C. Spencer The Wall Street Journal(6/16/16) published an article headlined “Environmental Groups Change Tune on Nuclear Power: Focus on Climate Change Has Raised Profile of Reactors, Now Viewed as Reliable, Carbon-Free Source of Energy.” Written by Amy Harder, the approximately 600-word piece appeared on the front page of the Journal’s B section.
Its dramatic lead-in: Continue reading
Plan for closing Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant to save money and carbon
Closing Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant Will Save Money And Carbon, Forbes, Amory B. Lovins, Cofounder and Chief Scientist, Rocky Mountain Institute, ablovins@rmi.org,www.rmi.org
A widespread claim—that dozens of nuclear plants, too costly to run profitably, now merit new subsidies to protect the earth’s climate—just collided with market reality.
The CEO of one of America’s most prominent and technically capable utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Company—previously chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute and the Edison Electric Institute—just announced its decision (subject to regulatory approvals) to close PG&E’s well-running twin nuclear reactors at Diablo Canyon because they’re uneconomic and won’t be needed.
Unlike previous nuclear shutdowns, some of which were too abrupt for immediate replacement with carbon-free resources, PG&E’s nuclear output will be phased out over 8–9 years, replaced timely and cost-effectively by efficiency and renewables. That means no more fossil fuel burned nor carbon emitted, all at less cost to ratepayers. How much less? Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) says at least $1 billion (net present value to 2044).
PG&E also agrees that removing the inflexible “must-run” nuclear output, which can’t easily and economically ramp down much, will help integrate more renewable power reliably into the grid. Midday solar, rather than being increasingly crowded out by continued nuclear overgeneration, will be able to supply more energy. As Germany found, integrating varying solar and windpower with steady “baseload” plants can present challenges for the the opposite of the reason originally supposed: not because wind and solar power vary (demand varies even less predictably), but because “baseload” plants are too inflexible.
The big economic lesson here is that nuclear power’s ability to displace fossil-fueled generation is not simply about tons of carbon dioxide saved. Nuclear power also incurs an operating cost that for many reactors, including Diablo Canyon, has become very high. Saving and reinvesting that avoidable cost can buy a larger quantity of cheaper carbon-displacing resources, saving even more carbon. Nearly all commentators, even Bloomberg’s astute editorial board(twice), have overlooked this advantageous swap.
As the Italian proverb says, arithmetic is not an opinion. So let’s do the math.
Renewables and efficiency cost less than operating many nuclear plants
Diablo Canyon’s forward operating cost, about $70/MWh (levelized 2014 $), is in the top quartile of the national nuclear fleet according to the industry’s latest published data. That quartile’s national average operating cost in 2010–12 averaged $62/MWh in 2013 $. (These operating costs include major repairs, called Net Capital Additions, that tend to rise in the aging fleet, but they exclude all charges for the original construction cost and its financing.)
But carbon-free replacements cost far less. In California, windpower and utility-scale photovoltaics cost around $30–50/MWh to build and run. U.S.-average renewables cost roughly $10/MWh less than in California. Here are their empirical market prices:……..
Saving carbon by closing uneconomic reactors…….
Propaganda meets reality
PG&E’s historic proposal contradicts each key premise of the crusade for more subsidies to avert the shutdown of uncompetitive nuclear plants. Most prominently, PG&E’s resource plan is designed specifically to get carbon-free replacements online to displace nuclear output before it’s turned off—not to substitute fossil fuels, as critics are vehemently assuming (as if they hadn’t read the proposal)……… http://www.forbes.com/sites/amorylovins/2016/06/22/close-a-nuclear-plant-save-money-and-carbon-improve-the-grid-says-pge/:
Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant can and should close today
Lies, damned lies and the nuclear industry! Media With Conscience News, Ace Hoffman 26 June 16 Three important nuclear power events occurred in the past seven days — one in Nebraska and two in California — which together show just how doomed and unworkable nuclear power really is.
In Nebraska, the Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) Board of Directors unanimously decided to shut down Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power plant because its cost of operation could not be justified against the current and expected future price of natural gas, solar and wind power (but mainly natural gas). Certainly natural gas prices are at an unnatural low compared to the price of oil and nuclear power, and that might change over the coming years, but natural gas prices cannot go up too much if they are to stay competitive with renewable energy prices — which are going to continue to plummet over the next few decades.
Solar panels thinner than a human hair have been developed in the labs. They don’t use many natural resources to make. Solar panels as flexible as a human hair have also been developed. They can be placed virtually anywhere. Wind turbine output keeps going up for the exact same land requirements, which of course, are already minimal to begin with. Power requirements of all the major household appliances keep coming down as better motors, coolers and pumps are developed. The future is bright for renewables, and getting brighter.
All this spelled doom for Fort Calhoun, a “small” (478 megawatts, the smallest operating reactor in the United States) lone reactor that cost about $178 million dollars to build when construction began in 1966, and now costs over $250 million annually to operate. It was “simply an economic decision” to close the facility according to the operators.
Being so old and run-down, it went offline yesterday suddenly, for a turbine issue, (its speed controller failed). But no matter how often a nuclear power plant goes offline without warning, regulators and operators still assure the public they are necessary for “baseload capacity.”
Lies, damned lies and the nuclear industry strike out again
In California, an apparently momentous decision was made regarding Diablo Canyon’s pair of massive nuclear reactors (~1,100 megawatts each), which first went online in the mid-1980s and were originally scheduled to close by this year, but were granted a 10-year extension a few years ago for no apparent reason at all.
After years of threatening to try to extend their license another 20 years to 60 years and beyond, its operator, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) announced that they would only run out their current license (good to 2024 and 2025 for units 1 and 2, respectively) and then be shut down permanently. The decision was made in cooperation with several environmental organizations (FoE, NRDC and A4NR) in some sort of secret backroom arrangement — an arrangement which has some good points, but has some very bad points, too.
First and foremost among the good points is, of course, that the plant will shut down. And second is that it will be replaced with renewable energy and increased energy conservation.
But first and foremost among the bad points is not only that it will take 10 more years, and not only that the decision is potentially reversible, but also that the aforementioned environmental groups apparently have lost interest in shutting the plant down earlier. That means another two million pounds of high-level nuclear waste will be generated in the meantime, with their approval. And worst of all, it means that if the San Andreas earthquake fault does what it’s been threatening to do for decades, and is actually considered late in doing, southern California will be ruined financially and environmentally. Not to mention the dozens of other faults that could shake the plant to smithereens any day of the week.
Additionally, while Fort Calhoun’s operators have promised to help the employees of that plant find other work (probably installing solar panels on rooftops, making new interconnections to the power grid, building wind turbines and so forth), Diablo Canyon has promised to take more than a third of a billion dollars of ratepayer money to do the same. As if it was the ratepayers who chose to make the workers work in a dying industry with high-paying jobs. As if there aren’t other nuclear power plants around the country that are having trouble finding workers, for those who want to stay in a dying industry. And as if there won’t be plenty of renewable energy jobs they can find for themselves.
In short, the deal stinks so badly, one activist in the Diablo Canyon area described it as being “sold down the river.”
n both cases, a major part of the decision was based on the fact that the electricity generated by Fort Calhoun and Diablo Canyon (and virtually every other nuclear power plant in the country) can be replaced immediately with other power sources, without the lights going out or reliability of the grid falling below set point levels. This is as it must be: Nuclear power plants require the rest of the grid to be operating or they themselves must shut down.
That’s why, when a massive power outage struck the northeastern United States in 2003, all the nuclear power plants in the area automatically shut down and could not help keep the grid up. They require about 30 megawatts of continuous power to operate, and as much as 100 megawatts during restart once they shut down for any reason. It took many days for the nuclear power plants to come back online even after the rest of the grid was restored. So much for the reliability of the “baseload” power system!
Diablo Canyon can and should close today. Even its owners have now admitted that its electricity output can be replaced entirely by renewables (although that might take a couple of years to accomplish, it would free up about 1500 workers (1200 PG&E employees, 200 subcontractors, and miscellaneous high-paid executives) to start installing solar panels and wind turbines. Its total output could be replaced in a matter of months.
Meanwhile, the nuclear waste at San Onofre is no longer being generated (SanO closed permanently in 2013 after a leaky steam generator could not be repaired). But the lies and damned lies continue spewing forth unabated from that complex as well. Last night, the quarterly Citizen’s Engagement Panel met once again, supposedly to engage with citizens but in fact, to push the utility’s agenda of cheap, ineffective, dangerous solutions to its nuclear waste problem — which it will have for 500,000 years unless something is done about it.
The meeting was attended by some high-powered outsiders from the Department of Energy and a former Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman, Dr. Allison Macfarlane. Earlier in the day several localized meetings were held with these outsiders for additional discussions. It all looks very cooperative on paper, but in reality it’s nothing but the regular dog-and-pony shows the nuclear industry and the NRC have been putting on for decades.
Time was, speakers at an NRC hearing were sworn in, swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That ended about 20 years ago, and now we have a non-governmental body making nonsense plans and decisions which will affect the local population for decades to come, will solve nothing, will obstruct real solutions (more on that in a moment), and will push the utilities’ agenda down everybody’s throats (literally, when the waste escapes its escarpments)………http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/59553-nuclear-industry.html
Pentagon’s nuclear-powered spending: a $trillion and climbing
Behold the Pentagon’s Amazing, Nuclear-Powered ATM, Mother Jones
When the going gets tough, the world’s toughest military sends out RFPs.
ANDREW COCKBURNJUN. 24 “………creating and maintaining an effective fighting force becomes a secondary consideration, reflecting a relative disinterest—remarkable to outsiders—in the actual business of war, as opposed to the business of raking in dollars for the Pentagon and its industrial and political partners. A key element of the strategy involves seeding the military budget with “development” projects that require little initial outlay but which, down the line, grow irreversibly into massive, immensely profitable production contracts for our weapons-making cartels……
ongoing and dramatic programs to invest vast sums in meaningless, useless, or superfluous weapons systems are the norm. There is no more striking example of this than current plans to rebuild the entire American arsenal of nuclear weapons in the coming decades, Obama’s staggering bequest to the budgets of his successors.
These nuclear initiatives have received far less attention than they deserve, perhaps because observers are generally loath to acknowledge that the Cold War and its attendant nuclear terrors, supposedly consigned to the ashcan of history a quarter-century ago, are being revived on a significant scale. The US is currently in the process of planning for the construction of a new fleet of nuclear submarines loaded with new intercontinental nuclear missiles, while simultaneously creating a new land-based intercontinental missile, a new strategic nuclear bomber, a new land-and-sea-based tactical nuclear fighter plane, a new long-range nuclear cruise missile (which, as recently as 2010, the Obama administration explicitly promisednot to develop), at least three nuclear warheads that are essentially new designs, and new fuses for existing warheads. In addition, new nuclear command-and-control systems are under development for a fleet of satellites (costing up to $1 billion each) designed to make the business of fighting a nuclear war more practical and manageable.
This massive nuclear buildup, routinely promoted under the comforting rubric of “modernization,” stands in contrast to the president’s lofty public ruminations on the topic of nuclear weapons. The most recent of these was delivered during his visit—the first by an American president—to Hiroshima last month. There, he urged“nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles” to “have the courage to escape the logic of fear, and pursue a world without them.”
In reality, that “logic of fear” suggests that there is no way to “fight” a nuclear war, given the unforeseeable but horrific effects of these immensely destructive weapons. They serve no useful purpose beyond deterring putative opponents from using them, for which an extremely limited number would suffice. During the Berlin crisis of 1961, for example, when the Soviets possessed precisely four intercontinental nuclear missiles, White House planners seriously contemplated launching an overwhelming nuclear strike on the USSR. It was, they claimed, guaranteed to achieve “victory.” As Fred Kaplan recounts in his book Wizards of Armageddon, the plan’s advocates conceded that the Soviets might, in fact, be capable of managing a limited form of retaliation with their few missiles and bombers in which as many as three million Americans could be killed, whereupon the plan was summarily rejected.
In other words, in the Cold War as today, the idea of “nuclear war-fighting” could not survive scrutiny in a real-world context. Despite this self-evident truth, the US military has long been the pioneer in devising rationales for fighting such a war via ever more “modernized” weapons systems. ……..
The drive to develop and build such systems on the irrational pretense that nuclear war fighting is a practical proposition persists today. One component of the current “modernization” plan is the proposed development of a new “dial-a-yield” version of the venerable B-61 nuclear bomb. Supposedly capable of delivering explosions of varying strength according to demand, this device will, at least theoretically, be guidable to its target with high degrees of accuracy and will also be able to burrowdeep into the earth to destroy buried bunkers. The estimated bill—$11 billion—is a welcome boost for the fortunes of the Sandia and Los Alamos weapons laboratories that are developing it.
The ultimate cost of this new nuclear arsenal in its entirety is essentially unknowable. The only official estimate we have so far came from the Congressional Budget Office, which last year projected a total of $350 billion. That figure, however, takes the “modernization” program only to 2024……..
Assiduously tabulating these projections, experts at the Monterey Center for Nonproliferation Studies peg the price of the total program at a trillion dollars. In reality, though, the true bill that will come due over the next few decades will almost certainly be multiples of that. For example, the Air Force has claimed that its new B-21 strategic bombers will each cost more than $564 million (in 2010 dollars), yet resolutely refuses to release its secret internal estimates for the ultimate cost of the program.
To offer a point of comparison, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the tactical nuclear bomber previously mentioned, was originally touted as costing no more than $35 million per plane. In fact, it will actually enter service with a sticker price well in excess of $200 million.
Nor does that trillion-dollar figure take into account the inevitable growth of America’s nuclear “shield.”……..http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/pentagon-budget-nuclear-spending
India stopped by China, from joining Nuclear Suppliers Group
China maintains its opposition to India joining a group of nations seeking to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons by controlling access to sensitive technology, said the head of the arms control department in China’s Foreign Ministry.
The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) met this week in Seoul, but China said it would not bend the rules and allow India membership as it had not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the main global arms control pact.
“Applicant countries must be signatories of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT),” Wang Qun, the head of arms control department in China’s Foreign Ministry, was quoted as saying in Seoul on Thursday night.
“This is a pillar, not something that China set. It is universally recognized by the international community,” Wang said according to a statement released by the Chinese foreign ministry on Friday.
Opponents argue that granting India membership would further undermine efforts to prevent proliferation. It would also infuriate India’s rival Pakistan, an ally of China’s, which has responded to India’s membership bid with one of its own.
Pakistan joining would be unacceptable to many, given its track record. The father of its nuclear weapons program ran an illicit network for years that sold nuclear secrets to countries including North Korea and Iran. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-nuclear-china-idUSKCN0ZA0IF
Illinois nuclear plant shutdown situation – defacto radioactive dump
Nuclear plant shutdown in Illinois could offer lessons for SLO County Power plant in Zion, Illinois, closed nearly 2 decades ago because of an employee’s mistake. Tribune, 26 June 16
Community leaders say storage of spent nuclear fuel is preventing redevelopment of desirable lakefront property
They are leading a push to obtain federal financial compensation for communities that become de facto storage sites for waste BY STEPHANIE FINUCANE sfinucane@thetribunenews.com. Nearly 20 years after the shutdown of a nuclear power plant in the small community of Zion, Illinois, the city’s finance director describes the local economy in a single word: struggling.
“We’ve lost about $18 million communitywide,” said David Knabel, referring to the annual property tax that used to be generated by the power plant. “That tax burden got shifted to businesses and residents.”
Since the plant closed, property tax rates rose 143 percent, according to city documents. That’s made it tough to attract new employers.
“With the tax rate going through the roof … who wants to buy a house or bring businesses in?” asked Knabel.
Yet Zion isn’t blaming the nuclear power plant. As local pastor and City Commissioner Mike McDowell pointed out, that was a business decision.
The city is upset, though, that it’s become a long-term storage site for highly radioactive spent fuel — something it never signed on for.
Officials say the spent fuel is preventing redevelopment of the prime lakefront property where the plant was built, and they’re looking to the federal government for financial relief.
“We can’t get the federal government to move it,” said McDowell, “and at this point, we’re not being compensated for the impact.”……..
Once the decommissioning is complete, the property will be returned to Exelon Corp., the parent of Zion’s operator, Commonwealth Edison.
Officials in the city of Zion don’t know when that will be, nor do they know how much of the property could be permanently off-limits because of the spent fuel storage facility.
Like reactor communities across the nation — including San Luis Obispo County — the citizens of Zion did not expect to store spent nuclear fuel indefinitely. They believed the federal government would make good on its commitment to accept the waste, which at one time was destined for Yucca Mountain, Nevada. That plan fell apart, however, and the federal government has yet to identify an alternative site for permanent storage.
Zion is leading a push for federal legislation that would provide financial compensation to communities that have become de facto storage sites for spent fuel………http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article86054762.html
Sierra Club remains categorically opposed to nuclear power
June 23, 2016 “Green Groups Ease Opposition to Nuclear Power” (Business & Tech, June 17) gets it wrong. The Sierra Club remains in firm opposition to dangerous nuclear power. The article reflects wishful thinking on the part of the nuclear industry but doesn’t accurately represent the position of the Sierra Club.It is categorically incorrect to suggest that the Sierra Club considers nuclear power a “bridge” to clean energy. Nuclear power, much like coal, oil and gas, is a bridge to nowhere. In Illinois the Sierra Club is part of a coalition to increase renewable energy and energy efficiency, not preserve nuclear reactors. America’s energy future must be powered by 100% clean, renewable energy like wind and solar—and nuclear in no way meets this requirement.
The Sierra Club’s successful work to stop and retire coal and gas operations has never precluded our efforts to oppose nuclear power, nor will it ever. Decades of evidence around the world clearly demonstrates that nuclear power remains a dirty and extremely dangerous energy source, and we will continue our efforts to block new reactors from being built and replace existing ones with 100% clean, renewable energy.
Japan’s anti-democratic secrecy law means no accountability in the nuclear industry
No accountability in nuclear industry http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/06/25/reader-mail/no-accountability-nuclear-industry/#.V3BNqtJ97Gh ROBERT MCKINNEY Following the June 16 quake in Hakodate, Hokkaido, nuclear plant operators in the area reported no damage, but even if there were problems, because of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s new anti-democratic secrecy law, they would not necessarily report them, nor would they feel any compunction to do so. The Nuclear Village Idiots can cover their backsides very nicely with this new secrecy law.
Public safety is hardly a concern of politicians or the nuclear power plant owners. Japan’s very much a totalitarian state once again. It simply uses democratic-sounding titles to cover up the true authoritarian nature of the government and senior industrial officials. It’s Tojo’s Japan with velvet gloves. Let’s hope the gloves never come off.
Senator Mark Rubio showing a little anxiety about who will carry the nuclear codes
Rubio: I hope I can trust whoever wins with the nuclear codes, The Hill By Rebecca Savransky, 26 June 16 Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Sunday avoided directly saying whether he’d trust presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton with the nuclear codes.
“Once you assume the office, no matter who holds that office, I think that the reality and the gravity of it always weighs on these people,” Rubio said on CBS’s “Face The Nation.”
“It’s a very difficult issue to face. So I would hope that I can trust no matter who wins with the nuclear codes.”
The Florida senator has said previously he doesn’t think presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump could be trusted with the nuclear codes……..http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/284944-rubio-i-hope-i-can-trust-whoever-wins-with-the-nuclear-codes
June 26 Energy News
World:
¶ Sweden is testing its first electric highway system for trucks. Siemens will help the country for next two years to test the eHighway system on a 1.25 miles stretch of highway on the north of Stockholm. The project may see a similar testing phase unveiled soon in California. [The TeCake]
Electric highway in Sweden
¶ The Chief Minister of the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh, addressing a seminar of Chinese companies and businesses, said the state is planning to increase its installed renewable energy capacity by five times in coming three years. The capacity is currently 2567 MW. [The Hitavada]
¶ The World Bank has approved a loan of $90 million to Vietnam. This is the first in a series of three credits that will support climate change and green growth policy actions under the Vietnamese government’s Support Program to Respond to Climate Change…
View original post 480 more words
Recycling Plutonium: How the US EPA is Disbursing Radioactive Waste From the Lowry Landfill to the Sewage System and onto Farmlands and Public Parks; More on the Ambushed Grand Jury
[Note that there is some overlap with yesterday’s post (the previous transcript) https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/06/25/grand-jury-accuses-justice-department-of-rocky-flats-nuclear-cover-up/ But it continues with new, additional, information].
From DemocracyNow.org:
“Recycling Plutonium: How the EPA is Disbursing Toxic and Radioactive Waste From the Lowry Landfill to the Sewage System and onto CO Farmlands and Public Parks
May 4, 2004
We speak with Colorado University Environmental Studies professor Adrienne Anderson about the Lowry Landfill. Citizen groups claim the landfill is widely contaminated with highly radioactive plutonium and other deadly wastes. The EPA is allowing the contaminated groundwater at the landfill to be discharged into the Denver metro sewage system, after only partial treatment. [includes rush transcript]
* Adrienne Anderson, professor of Environmental & Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder. In 1997 Anderson filed a federal whistleblower case on a plan to mix plutonium waste with sewer sludge, process it into fertilizer and then use on…
View original post 3,828 more words
June 25 Energy News
Opinion:
¶ “Overview – Brexit charts uneasy future for renewables” • The “world’s most complicated divorce” will have a huge impact on the UK’s environment and energy policies and on climate policy in the EU, the world’s largest political bloc, with a combined population of 500 million people. [SeeNews Renewables]
Brexit CC0 1.0 Universal by PublicDomainPictures.net
World:
¶ The Australian Renewable Energy Agency says the final round of bidding for its large scale solar funding shows technology costs are still falling, and will likely continue to fall. ARENA may be in its last grant funding round before funds are stripped by the Coalition government. [CleanTechnica]
¶ Dong Energy is to go ahead with the 448-MW Borkum Riffgrund 2 offshore wind farm in the German North Sea. The company said the project, which is expected to be fully commissioned in the first half of 2019, will consist…
View original post 531 more words
Todays’ Nuclear Citizens Jury South Australia – some snippets
Morning Session
View original post 652 more words
Grand Jury Accuses Justice Department of Rocky Flats Nuclear Cover-Up
From DemocracyNow.org: “Grand Jury Accuses Justice Department of Rocky Flats Nuclear Cover-Up
May 4, 2004
We speak with Wes McKinley, a Colorado rancher and the foreman of a grand jury that investigated activity at Rocky Flats about the charges he makes in his new book The Ambushed Grand Jury: How the Justice Department Covered Up Government Nuclear Crimes and How We Caught Them Red Handed. [includes rush transcript]
Wes McKinley, a Colorado rancher and the foreman of a grand jury that investigated activity at Rocky Flats. He is co-author of Ambushed Grand Jury: How the Justce Department Covered Up Government Nuclear Crimes And How We Caught Them Red Handed
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: So let’s talk about what’s happened. Secret midnight burning of radioactive waste, an FBI spy flight with infrared cameras. I wanted to bring Wes…
View original post 1,441 more words
Toxic Suburbia: Fantastic Rocky Flats Vistas, Plutonium Breezes
From the Colorado Independent:
“Toxic Suburbia: Fantastic Rocky Flats vistas, plutonium breezes
It’s an affordable, eco-subdivision. It’s located next to a nuclear waste site.
by Nicolene Durham January 03, 2014 Environment/Energy
ARVADA, Colo. – There’s a Spielberg-like quality to the Candelas subdivision rising in the foothills here. It’s a suburban paradise that comes with wide-open views, solar panels and sustainability farm credits, but also with the radioactive vestiges of nuclear weapons manufacturing that critics say pose a lingering threat of illness and death.
It’s located between Golden and Boulder, just 15 miles from Denver. It’s also a mile south of the site of the Rocky Flats weapons plant that operated from the 1952 until 1992. Cold War government staffers working in a cluster of office and warehouse buildings made the plutonium triggers embedded in an arsenal of nuclear weapons that could have incinerated all of the Soviet Union and…
View original post 2,420 more words
1 This Month
of the week – Shut Down Drone Warfare!
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
Petition to revoke the licensing of the Near Surface Nuclear Disposal Facility (NSDF) at Chalk River. https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7247
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (103)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 