In the lead-up to the 2015 election, he said the economy and environment “go together like paddles and canoes. Unless you have both, you won’t get to where you are going.” Such vacuous statements helped him win a majority government.
Did Liberal voters think “real change” would mean maintaining fossil fuel subsidies, buying the Kinder Morgan pipeline, and promoting new nuclear reactors?
When the Liberals renamed the cabinet committee on “Environment, Climate Change and Energy” to “Environment and Clean Growth” on August 28, 2018, Trudeau’s office said this “reflects the government’s commitment to addressing climate change through growing the economy.” But putting “clean” in front of “growth” is a con job — like putting “sustainable” in front of “development.”
Behind closed doors in the “clean growth” cabinet committee, the minister of natural resources will discuss next year’s “Clean Energy Ministerial” — a gathering of energy ministers from the world’s richest nations, hosted by Canada.
One of Canada’s objectives for this meeting, together with the U.S., is to advance plans for the “next generation” of nuclear reactors. In preparation, a federal nuclear reactor “road map” will be released next month at a Canadian Nuclear Society conference in Ottawa subsidized by the Trudeau government.
For the one-percenters, “clean growth” includes nuclear power. The military industrial complex needs nuclear power and nuclear weapons just as much as it needs fossil fuels.
Government officials and lobbyists who call nuclear power “clean energy” cannot provide a shred of evidence that a new generation of reactors will help Canada and other nations achieve the Paris Agreement greenhouse gas reduction targets.
The real point of this exercise is to perpetuate the military industrial complex.
The nuclear industry is desperately casting about for ways to attract young scientists and engineers. It promotes fantasies of reactor technologies that will provide carbon-free electricity, eliminate existing nuclear waste stockpiles, desalinate ocean water, power remote Indigenous communities, and enable travel to Mars.
But these technologies have been around for decades. They are enormously expensive. They require huge government subsidies, waste taxpayer dollars and generate budget deficits characteristic of the U.S. military industrial complex.
Climate justice incompatible with economic growth
Addressing climate change through economic growth is an ecocidal fantasy. To claim that humans can appropriate more and more of the planet’s resources, and still protect the environment and halt climate change is ludicrous.
This is business as usual — continuation of the “great acceleration” created by post-Second World War governments who transformed the war machine into the “peacetime” military industrial complex.
Politicians and corporate executives — the one-percenters — have no intention of putting the brakes on this machine. They need to fuel the nuclear sub fleets in the U.S. and U.K., and the armoured vehicles that Canada makes and sells to Saudi Arabia. They will try to extract every last gram of uranium and drop of oil. Nuclear and fossil fuels are both the means and end of war.
Ultimately, the military industrial complex is waging war against the planet, against ourselves and against all living creatures. The Earth is in great peril.
Revolution is brewing. Activists, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike are rejecting these corporate-driven technological fantasies. Energy is changing. The capitalist system will not survive. But what will replace it?
Ole Hendrickson is a retired forest ecologist and a founding member of the Ottawa River Institute, a non-profit charitable organization based in the Ottawa Valley.
Police investigation into overheated river at Paks NPP after report by MEP Benedek Jávor, ATLATSZO English OROSZI BABETTby Babett Oroszi English version by Zsuzsanna Liptákné Horváth. 1 Nov 18 You can read the original, Hungarian-language story here.Hungarian police are investigating whether the water in the river Danube was warmer than 30 degrees at the Paks nuclear plant during the August heatwave. According to Hungarian regulations, if the water temperature reaches that point, the nuclear plant has to be shut off. It was not, but there is a suspicion that water temperature did reach 30 degrees. Hungarian MEP Jávor Benedekfiled a report at the police and now the case is being investigated.According to measurements by Átlátszó and Energiaklub, the temperature of the river Danube reached 30 °C during the August heatwave, exactly where the Paks nuclear plant’s cooling water enters the river.
According to a 2001 government decree, the Paks nuclear plant must cease operations for environmental reasons if the temperature of the Danube reaches 30 °C anywhere in the 500 meters following the point where the cooling water is deposited into the river.
The nuclear plant’s official thermometer never measured more than 30 °C in August, therefore the power plant or any of its blocks were not shut off. Concerned about the river’s ecosystem, MEP Benedek Jávor requested a police investigation.
The first step that led to the current investigation was when Átlátszó and Energiaklub, a Hungarian NGO, measured the water temperature in August. Energiaklub had requested the official data about the river’s temperature before, filing a freedom of information request. However, during the time of the heatwave Paks stopped announcing their official data. Átlátszó’s group of experts had assumed that the temperature of the water rose above 30 °C.
To prove this, and to protect wildlife in the river, we traveled to Paks and measured the water temperature. Before the point of entry of the nuclear plant’s cooling water, we measured 25-26 °C. Downstream, however, within 500 meters from the cooling water’s entry point, we measured above 30 °C at multiple locations.
We took a video of the process and published an article about our unofficial data. These show that at every single location downstream where we measured the river’s temperature, it exceeded the 30 °C.
APAG2 2nd Aug 2018 *Fusion** The nuclear lobby claims wrongly that tritium is harmless to discharge into
the environment, and that nuclear fusion, in which tritium is used as fuel,
is safe. With this consummate manipulation, the French nucleocrats are
passing ITER the nuclear fusion reactor currently under construction at
Cadarache [Bouches-du-Rhone] a carte blanche. But it is not safe. https://apag2.wordpress.com/2018/08/02/iter-tritium-danger-%e2%80%a8larnaque-mortifere-du-lobby-du-nucleaire/
A supporter of Radiation Free Lakeland has been doing excellent work in a series of letters to the Rt Hon Claire Perry MP in relation to fracking in Lancashire near the Springfields Nuclear Fuel site. The reply is an essay in nonchalance which is breathtaking in the wake of the supposed precautionary principle lessons learnt […]
Opinion: ¶ “Ten Simple Changes to Help Save the Planet” • Climate change is real, and we are starting to see some of the ways that it affects us. It increases the likelihood of flooding in Miami and elsewhere, threatens the millions of people living along the Brahmaputra River, and disrupts reproduction of plants and […]
The Nation 2nd Nov 2018 *Climate** Are we doomed? It’s the most common thing people ask me when they learn
that I study climate politics. Fair enough. The science is grim, as the UN
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just reminded us with
a report on how hard it will be to keep average global warming to 1.5
degrees Celsius. But it’s the wrong question.
Yes, the path we’re on is ruinous. It’s just as true that other, plausible pathways are not.
That’s the real, widely ignored, and surprisingly detailed message of the
IPCC report. We’re only doomed if we change nothing. The IPCC report
makes it clear that if we make the political choice of bankrupting the
fossil-fuel industry and sharing the burden of transition fairly, most
humans can live in a world better than the one we have now.
And yet doom is what’s being amplified by seemingly every major newspaper and magazine,
and the mainstream media more broadly. A standout example was David
Wallace-Wells’s hot take on the IPCC report for New York magazine,
charmingly titled, “UN Says Climate Genocide Is Coming. It’s Actually
Worse Than That.” There’s a lot to say about the emotional texture of
this kind of reporting. But the deeper problem is how this coverage fails
to capture climate breakdown’s core cause-and-effect dynamic, thus
missing how much scope for action there still is. https://www.thenation.com/article/mainstream-media-un-climate-report-analysis/
Think Progress 31st Oct 201*Yucca Mountain** One thing that unites Nevadans is opposition to President Donald Trump’s effort to turn the state into a huge nuclear waste dump. That’s why many
were surprised when Trump suggested he might abandon that policy after
touring the state recently with GOP Senator Dean Heller, who is in a tight
reelection race against Democrat Jacky Rosen.
But Trump’s Energy Secretary, Rick Perry, admitted on Friday the administration still supports
building the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository outside of Las Vegas.
GDF Watch 4th Nov 2018 , The company responsible for delivering Sweden’s deep geological repository, SKB, is planning to subject their research into copper
corrosion to international peer review in the new year. SKB believe this is
the most transparent and open way in which to address concerns about the
contentious issue, which has held up final decision-making on the Swedish
national repository for higher activity radioactive waste.
Earlier this year the Swedish Environmental Court largely approved SKB’s plans for a
geological disposal facility in Osthammar. However, the Court had concerns
about the speed at which copper canisters corrode and the potential
consequential environmental impact. Conflicting scientific evidence was
presented to the Court. The Court decided that this was something the
Swedish Government needed to consider further before any approval was given
to the planned radioactive waste disposal facility. The Swedish Government
asked SKB to provide additional information by 31 March 2019. http://www.gdfwatch.org.uk/2018/11/04/sweden-copper-corrosion-update/
GDF Watch 28th Oct 2018 The publication of the tailored review on the Committee on Radioactive
Waste Management (CoRWM) sets out some revised principles for the
Committee’s future role. While the review says that the Committee’s
role and objectives needs updating, and that these should be set out in a
new framework, the Government says little about what that role might
actually be.
However, one specific area of activity under review is the
extent to which, and on what basis, CoRWM more actively participates in
public and community engagement. The July appointment of Sir Nigel Thrift
as CoRWM’s new Chair underlines the Government’s awareness of the need
to shift priority as the siting process relaunches. Sir Nigel is a human
geographer, a social scientist.
This is a marked shift from CoRWM’s
historic technical/scientific foundations, and a recognition that the
issues are increasingly social rather than technical – civics not
science. The minutes from CoRWM’s recent public plenary sessions indicate
that the Committee itself has been examining whether and how it should
become more active and more visible. Those who gave evidence to the
Committee, including GDFWatch, were in agreement that a revamped CoRWM
could have a critical role in building public trust in geological disposal
and the siting process.
Nuclear submarine Arihant completes first deterrence patrol mission
The success of INS Arihant gives a fitting response to those who indulge in nuclear blackmail, says Prime Minister Narendra Modi
Live Mint, Nov 05 2018. New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday said that India’s first nuclear armed submarine INS Arihant had successfully completed its first deterrence patrol, heralding India’s entry into an exclusive club of powers with land, air and sea-based nuclear weapons delivery platforms………
In comments posted on Twitter, Modi said the Arihant feat was “historic because it marks the completing of the successful establishment of the nuclear triad. India’s nuclear triad will be an important pillar of global peace and stability”, underlining India’s “No first use” policy and the role of the sea-based strategic platform as a guarantor of peace. ……“India is a land of peace,” Modi said. “Peace is our strength, not our weakness. Our nuclear programme must be seen with regard to India’s efforts to further world peace and stability,” he said……….. https://www.livemint.com/Politics/MPSTSAYPZq855MBeczEg1N/India-says-nuclear-submarine-makes-first-patrol-PM-Modi-war.html
North Korea warns of returning to nuclear policy, News 24 2018-11-04 North Korea has warned the US it will “seriously” consider returning to a state policy aimed at building nuclear weapons if Washington does not end tough economic sanctions against the impoverished regime.
For years, the North had pursued a “byungjin” policy of simultaneously developing its nuclear capabilities alongside the economy.
In April, citing a “fresh climate of detente and peace” on the peninsula, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un declared the nuclear quest complete and said his country would focus on “socialist economic construction”.
But a statement issued by the North’s foreign ministry said Pyongyang could revert to its former policy if the US did not change its stance over sanctions.
“The word ‘byungjin’ may appear again and the change of the line could be seriously reconsidered,” said the statement carried by the official KCNA news agency late on Friday.
Sanctions
At a historic summit in Singapore in June, US President Donald Trump and Kim signed a vaguely-worded statement on denuclearisation.
But little progress has been made since then, with Washington pushing to maintain sanctions against the North until its “final, fully verified denuclearisation” and Pyongyang condemning US demands as “gangster-like”.
“The improvement of relations and sanctions are incompatible,” said the statement, released under the name of the director of the foreign ministry’s Institute for American Studies.
“What remains to be done is the US corresponding reply,” it added.
The statement is the latest sign of Pyongyang’s increasing frustration with Washington……..
Pompeo Resuming Nuclear Talks with N. Korea This Week, VOA, November 04, 2018 Ken Bredemeier,
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says he is resuming denuclearization talks with North Korea this week in New York, meeting with Pyongyang’s second in command, Kim Yong Chol.
Progress on ending Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons programs has slowed in the months since the Singapore summit in June between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, when the two leaders signed a general statement calling for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
But Pompeo called the coming talks “a good opportunity” to move toward specifics of when and how North Korea might end its nuclear weapons program. The United States is seeking to finalize a deal by the end of Trump’s first term in office in January 2021.
Pyongyang said Friday it would “seriously” consider resuming its nuclear testing if U.S. economic sanctions against North Korea are not lifted, but Pompeo, in an interview on Fox News Sunday, dismissed the threat……..
Pompeo said there would be “no economic relief until we have achieved our ultimate objective,” the end of North Korea’s nuclear program.
Global Warming Is Messing with the Jet Stream. That Means More Extreme Weather.
A new study links the buildup of greenhouse gas emissions to more frequent heat waves, floods and droughts in the Northern Hemisphere.
BY BOB BERWYN, INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS, 31 OCT 18 Greenhouse gases are increasingly disrupting the jet stream, a powerful river of winds that steers weather systems in the Northern Hemisphere. That’s causing more frequent summer droughts, floods and wildfires, a new study says.
The findings suggest that summers like 2018, when the jet stream drove extreme weather on an unprecedented scale across the Northern Hemisphere, will be 50 percent more frequent by the end of the century if emissions of carbon dioxide and other climate pollutants from industry, agriculture and the burning of fossil fuels continue at a high rate.
In a worst-case scenario, there could be a near-tripling of such extreme jet stream events, but other factors, like aerosol emissions, are a wild card, according to the research, published today in the journal Science Advances.
The study identifies how the faster warming of the Arctic twists the jet stream into an extreme pattern that leads to persistent heat and drought extremes in some regions, with flooding in other areas.
The researchers said they were surprised by how big a role other pollutants play in the jet stream’s behavior, especially aerosols—microscopic solid or liquid particles from industry, agriculture, volcanoes and plants. Aerosols have a cooling effect that partially counteracts the jet stream changes caused by greenhouse gases, said co-author Dim Comou, a climate and extreme weather researcher at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts Research and the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
“The aerosols forcing was a bit of a surprise to us,” Comou said. “Those emissions are expected to decrease rapidly in the mid-latitude regions in the next 10 to 30 years” because of phasing out of pollution to protect people from breathing unhealthy air.
In recent decades, aerosol pollution has actually been slowing down the global warming process across the Northern Hemisphere’s mid-latitude industrial regions. If aerosol emissions drop rapidly, as projected, these regions would warm faster.
That would change the temperature contrast between the Arctic and mid-latitudes, which would dampen the warming effect of greenhouse gases on the jet stream. By how much depends on the rate, location and timing of the reductions, and the offset would end by mid-century, when man-made aerosols are expected to be mostly gone and no longer reflecting incoming solar radiation, said Pennsylvania State University climate scientist and study lead author Michael Mann. ……….
The new study focuses on summer extremes, while other research has looked at how global warming affects the jet stream in winter.
What Happens in the Arctic Doesn’t Stay There
Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at UCLA and the National Center for Atmospheric Research who was not involved with the new research, said the study has some “compelling new evidence on the link between amplified Arctic warming and extreme mid-latitude weather during the summer months.”
What happens in the Arctic doesn’t stay there. Increased melting of reflective sea ice in summer exposes more dark-colored ocean to absorb heat, and that heats the surrounding land. As Arctic warming races ahead of the rest of the global average, the temperature contrasts that drive the jet stream are reduced, and the river of wind more frequently twists into sharp and slow-moving or stationary waves.
The 1986 Chernobyl accident resulted in one of the highest unintentional releases of radioactivity in history. The graphite moderator of reactor 4 was exposed to air and ignited, shooting plumes of radioactive fallout across what is now Belarus, Ukraine, Russia, and Europe. While few people live near Chernobyl now, animals living in the vicinity of the accident allow us to study the effects of radiation and gauge recovery from the disaster.
Most domestic animals have moved away from the accident, and those deformed farm animals that were born did not reproduce. After the first few years following the accident, scientists focused on studies of wild animals and pets that had been left behind, in order to learn about Chernobyl’s impact.
Although the Chernobyl accident can’t be compared to effects from a nuclear bombbecause the isotopes released by the reactor differ from those produced by a nuclear weapon, both accidents and bombs cause mutations and cancer.
It’s crucial to study the effects of the disaster to help people understand the serious and long-lasting consequences of nuclear releases. Moreover, understanding the effects of Chernobyl may help humanity react to other nuclear power plant accidents.
The Relationship Between Radioisotopes and Mutations
You may wonder how, exactly, radioisotopes (a radioactive isotope) and mutations are connected. The energy from radiation can damage or break DNA molecules. If the damage is severe enough, cells can’t replicate and the organism dies. Sometimes DNA can’t be repaired, producing a mutation. Mutated DNA may result in tumors and affect an animal’s ability to reproduce. If a mutation occurs in gametes, it can result in a nonviable embryo or one with birth defects.
Additionally, some radioisotopes are both toxic and radioactive. The chemical effects of the isotopes also impact the health and reproduction of affected species.
The types of isotopes around Chernobyl change over time as elements undergo radioactive decay. Cesium-137 and iodine-131 are isotopes that accumulate in the food chain and produce most of the radiation exposure to people and animals in the affected zone.
Examples of Domestic Genetic Deformities
Ranchers noticed an increase in genetic abnormalities in farm animals immediately following the Chernobyl accident. In 1989 and 1990, the number of deformities spiked again, possibly as a result of radiation released from the sarcophagus intended to isolate the nuclear core. In 1990, around 400 deformed animals were born. Most deformities were so severe the animals only lived a few hours.
Examples of defects included facial malformations, extra appendages, abnormal coloring, and reduced size. Domestic animal mutations were most common in cattle and pigs. Also, cows exposed to fallout and fed radioactive feed produced radioactive milk.
The health and reproduction of animals near Chernobyl were diminished for at least the first six months following the accident. Since that time, plants and animals have rebounded and largely reclaimed the region. Scientists collect information about the animals by sampling radioactive dung and soil and watching animals using camera traps.
The Chernobyl exclusion zone is a mostly-off-limits area covering over 1,600 square miles around the accident. The exclusion zone is a sort of radioactive wildlife refuge. The animals are radioactive because they eat radioactive food, so they may produce fewer young and bear mutated progeny. Even so, some populations have grown. Ironically, the damaging effects of radiation inside the zone may be less than the threat posed by humans outside of it. Examples of animals seen within the zone include Przewalksi’s horses, wolves, badgers, swans, moose, elk, turtles, deer, foxes, beavers, boars, bison, mink, hares, otters, lynx, eagles, rodents, storks, bats, and owls.
Not all animals fare well in the exclusion zone. Invertebrate populations (including bees, butterflies, spiders, grasshoppers, and dragonflies) in particular have diminished. This is likely because the animals lay eggs in the top layer of soil, which contains high levels of radioactivity.
Radionuclides in water have settled into the sediment in lakes. Aquatic organisms are contaminated and face ongoing genetic instability. Affected species include frogs, fish, crustaceans, and insect larvae.
While birds abound in the exclusion zone, they are examples of animals that still face problems from radiation exposure. A study of barn swallows from 1991 to 2006 indicated birds in the exclusion zone displayed more abnormalities than birds from a control sample, including deformed beaks, albinistic feathers, bent tail feathers, and deformed air sacs. Birds in the exclusion zone had less reproductive success. Chernobyl birds (and also mammals) often had smaller brains, malformed sperm, and cataracts.
The Famous Puppies of Chernobyl
Not all of the animals living around Chernobyl are entirely wild. There are around 900 stray dogs, mostly descended from those left behind when people evacuated the area. Veterinarians, radiation experts, and volunteers from a group called The Dogs of Chernobyl capture the dogs, vaccinate them against diseases, and tag them. In addition to tags, some dogs are fitted with radiation detector collars. The dogs offer a way to map radiation across the exclusion zone and study the ongoing effects of the accident. While scientists generally can’t get a close look at individual wild animals in the exclusion zone, they can monitor the dogs closely. The dogs are, of course, radioactive. Visitors to the area are advised to avoid petting the pooches to minimize radiation exposure.
References
Galván, Ismael; Bonisoli-Alquati, Andrea; Jenkinson, Shanna; Ghanem, Ghanem; Wakamatsu, Kazumasa; Mousseau, Timothy A.; Møller, Anders P. (2014-12-01). “Chronic exposure to low-dose radiation at Chernobyl favours adaptation to oxidative stress in birds”. Functional Ecology. 28 (6): 1387–1403.
Moeller, A. P.; Mousseau, T. A. (2009). “Reduced abundance of insects and spiders linked to radiation at Chernobyl 20 years after the accident”. Biology Letters. 5 (3): 356–9.
Møller, Anders Pape; Bonisoli-Alquati, Andea; Rudolfsen, Geir; Mousseau, Timothy A. (2011). Brembs, Björn, ed. “Chernobyl Birds Have Smaller Brains”. PLoS ONE. 6 (2): e16862.
Poiarkov, V.A.; Nazarov, A.N.; Kaletnik, N.N. (1995). “Post-Chernobyl radiomonitoring of Ukrainian forest ecosystems”. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity. 26 (3): 259–271.
Smith, J.T. (23 February 2008). “Is Chernobyl radiation really causing negative individual and population-level effects on barn swallows?”. Biology Letters. The Royal Society Publishing. 4 (1): 63–64.
Wood, Mike; Beresford, Nick (2016). “The wildlife of Chernobyl: 30 years without man”. The Biologist. London,UK: Royal Society of Biology. 63 (2): 16–19.
This paper attempts to refute the myth of “clean nuclear energy”, and discusses the unethical impact on the environment of the overall process of the nuclear energy electricity production industry, from mining to decommissioning, through the problematic framework of “health risk analysis”, “economical feasibility” and “sustainability”. It also focuses on the economic and safety fragility of developing countries in the South to deal with big loans or a possible catastrophe, not to mention managing nuclear waste for a very long period of time.
Finally, the paper diverges all the inductions of the different criteria discussed towards inferring a global categorically imperative ethical perception based on a biocentric stance that takes United Nations recommendations into consideration, such as the “Precautionary Principle”, the declarations on Human Rights and the rights of future generations to a healthy and sustainable environment, in order to settle down to an “ecosophical” conclusion.
1- Introduction: The “clean nuclear energy” myth!
Nuclear energy is still one of the options used today across the world, thought to be a clean source of energy that produces neither CO2 nor other Ozone related pollutants into the atmosphere. However, it is now been verified that the complete fuel cycle of nuclear energy production is generous in producing GHG as well as CFCs; from mining and milling to fuel enrichment, constructing and operating the nuclear facility, transportation of nuclear fuel, safety and security measures, reprocessing and recycling the depleted nuclear fuel, manufacturing by-products, encasing and burying the nuclear waste and eventually decommissioning the nuclear facility and its surrounding environment, including the contaminated soil(1).
Concerned communities in Japan who are removing contaminated soil and conducting clean up operations are using independent researchers because they have lost faith in their government: “The roots of mistrust came out after authorities issued radiation readings that often turned out to be incorrect”(2). This comes as a proof that governments don’t consider life cycle assessment mechanisms in calculating accurate GHG emissions, insurance, cost of KWh of electricity produced or genome radioactive infuriation. Most of the research is government sponsored or controlled by nuclear commissions, thus falling in “conflict of interest” controversy.
The nuclear fuel cycle is a generous CO2 emitter that can exceed 288 grams of CO2 e/KWh, or (66)g as a mean value, even when existing studies fail to consider emissions of co-products (3) which cause global warming too. Research on light water nuclear reactors showed CO2 emission up to 220 g/KWh (4), yet this value is expected to rise as uranium ore grade worldwide is deteriorating by time. The USA ore grade average, for example, dropped from 0.28% U3O8 to 0.07 – 0.11% (1100 ppm) in 40 years (5). The complete life cycle assessment mechanism considered to calculate CO2 equivalent (CO2 e/KWh) in the previous analysis can raise this value significantly!
A comparative study on GHG emissions of thin-film photovoltaic electricity generation yielded a range of carbon foot print of 14-26 g/KWh under 2400 KWh per square meter per year, through a performance of 80%, for a life time of 30 years(6). A median value of carbon foot print for wind power was calculated to be 11 g/KWh(7), compared to the 66 g for nuclear without considering co-products emissions, uranium ore grade deterioration …etc.
The nuclear fuel cycle also produces chemical compounds that can harm the Ozone layer due to the generous emissions of CFCs during uranium enrichment. CFC 114 produced is an Ozone layer depletory, where as 93% of the CFC 114 released in the USA is from uranium enrichment (8).
Further more, the enrichment of uranium is a highly polluting industry during which U238 (Depleted Uranium) is produced; a heavy metal, 1.7 times heavier than lead, used in encasing ammunition among other things. It burns upon impact and 80% of its weight disintegrates into aerosol powder (half – radioactive life 4.5 billion years, the same as the Earth’s age) (9).
Regardless of these justified arguments, some might still argue that nuclear energy emits far less CO2 than some fossil fuels, particularly coal. However, we would like to counter-argue that claim on the basis that nuclear energy production is unethical on the bases of a set of criteria:
Health risk analysis, economic feasibility, sustainability, security and liability, which will be discussed in this paper. Additional arguments would be based on the “Precautionary Principle”, United Nations Declaration on Human Rights and the right of future generations in a healthy, safe and sustainable environment.
For those who might still believe that moral responsibility and ethical stances don’t change the world just have to wait and see how an ethics committee decision shaped the future of nuclear Germany!…………”
