Nuclear reprocessing does not belong in a Climate bill
STOP GLOBAL WARMING
Bill Fowlie
1 August 09
Some members of Congress think they have the answer to what to do with high-level radioactive waste: “reprocessing”. Nuclear reprocessing separates plutonium and uranium from spent nuclear reactor fuel. Supporters of this costly and dangerous technology want to add reprocessing provisions to the Senate climate bill that is planned to be debated this fall.Reprocessing would cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, undermine U.S. nonproliferation policy, pollute the environment, and threaten public health. According to the National Academy of Sciences, the cost of reprocessing existing spent fuel in the United States would total more than $500 billion.
The development of reprocessing technology in the US would make it harder to prevent other countries from pursuing this nuclear weapons technology. Moreover, reprocessing complicates the nuclear waste problem, rather than solves it. Reprocessing is the most polluting part of the nuclear fuel cycle and actually increases the amount of waste that must be managed.
“There is money in energy efficiency”
There is money in energy efficiency Business World
21 July 09 Investments in energy efficiency projects are enjoying a resurgence of popularity in attracting investments, although they still have to play catchup to their more popular cleantech cousin, renewable energy. This was apparent from the Asian Clean Energy Forum (ACEF) held at the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Manila last June 15-19.One of the concepts explored in the ACEF was the concept of an equivalent power plant, or “efficiency power plant,” as some of the speakers called it. An efficiency power plant is a visualization of savings in power capacity from energy savings, a concept that is useful considering that most laypersons struggle to conceptualize energy efficiency, unlike the popular images of renewable wind turbines and solar farms etched in many minds……………………..
Energy efficiency is a relatively inexpensive and proven way to contribute to climate change mitigation, and at the same time contribute to the bottom line. We should expect it to share the limelight with its more visible cleantech cousin, renewable energy, particularly with ADB’s announcement during the closing plenary (and in media releases) that its target for energy efficiency investments is $2 billion.
But until a way can be found to help businessmen and investors visualize what energy efficiency is and its viability as an investment vehicle, it will always remain the unsung relative of its more popular cleantech cousin, renewable energy.
Nuclear Title May Not Be Enough to Push Senate Climate Bill Over the Top –
Nuclear Title May Not Be Enough to Push Senate Climate Bill Over the Top The New York Times By KATHERINE LING Reporters Allison Winter, Alex Kaplun and Darren Samuelsohn contributed. 17 July 09 While supporters of nuclear energy ardently proclaim the power source is necessary to combat climate change, incentives for nuclear power may not be the silver bullet sponsors need to pass climate legislation in the Senate this year…………………………………The energy committee bill has several perks for nuclear energy including a Clean Energy Development Administration, training programs for nuclear education, and exclusion of new nuclear generation or capacity upgrades through efficiency at existing nuclear plants from the power sales baseline used to measure the renewable electricity standard (RE………………..The House climate bill, H.R. 2454 (pdf), also contains a Clean Energy Development Administration — although it prevents any technology from using more than 30 percent of total available funds. It also includes the exclusion of new nuclear generation from the power sales baseline used to calculate the RES………………………………..The underlying question for sponsors: If nuclear incentives are not enough to get undecided senators on board with cap and trade, what is the point of including them at all?…………………..The nuclear issue dominated much of the debate at a hearing on Tuesday………………………”What we are hopeful for in any climate bill are those provisions. One, the recognition of nuclear as a clean energy source so if someone has nuclear in their portfolio they should be recognized for that and, two, recognition that to move forward we are going to have to private-public partnership of government and private enterprise,” said Derrick Freeman, senior director, of NEI’s legislative programs.
Nuclear Title May Not Be Enough to Push Senate Climate Bill Over the Top – NYTimes.com
Too hot for nuke power
Too hot for nuke power Deseret News 16 July 09
Proponents of nuclear power in Utah probably have not noticed an article in the UK Times (July 13, 2009) regarding the problems France is having with its nuclear-power plants, problems that bear on the feasibility of nuclear power in Utah.France is in the grips of another hot summer, with air temperatures in the 80s. Water temperatures have exceeded the limits under which plants cooled by river water can safely operate.As a result of the heat, France has had to reduce power generation by one-third and is now importing power from England. Much the same thing happened during the heat wave of 2003.
Reading this, I couldn’t help thinking about the nuclear plant proposed for Green River, where summer temperatures are regularly in high 90s. T
he water temperature of the Green River at Jensen on July 13, 2009, was 23.5 degrees Celsius, almost as high as the maximum allowed for water returned to rivers from France’s nuclear plants. During the drought of 1999-2005, Green River water temperatures reached 25.4 degrees.
As the earth warms, high river temperatures will become commonplace. Nuclear plants, especially those dependent on rivers, will become untenable. Utah should avoid this boondoggle now.
No coal, no nuclear, only renewable energy for Scotland by 2030?
Red, Green and Blue by Mridul Chadha
July 15th, 2009
According to a new study, Scotland could shut down all its coal and nuclear power plants in the next 20 years and fulfill all its energy needs using renewable sources. The study commissioned by a consortium of environmental groups and conducted by an independent engineering consultant will soon be presented to the Scottish government. The study hold significant importance as the government has set ambitious goals for cutting carbon emissions and switching to renewable energy sources for power generation. The research studies and evaluates five different scenarios to predict the energy demand and generation trends over the next 20 years……………………… The report is revolutionary as even the worst case scenario (Scenario One) would mean a significant supply (64 percent) of electricity coming from renewable sources. With additional tools of energy efficiency and targeted financial help for small and micro scale energy generation, Scotland would be able to generate a huge power surplus.
At a time when the world leaders are struggling to even promise significant emission cuts, Scottish government’s continuous efforts to promote renewable energy and cut carbon emissions to meet the highly ambitious goals is commendable.
No Coal, No Nuclear, Only Renewable Energy For Scotland By 2030?
Another Green World: Nuclear power? No point, says new report
Nuclear power? No point, says new report
Another Green World 12 july 09 In Nuclear Power? No Point! the Green Party’s spokesperson on trade and industry, Darren Johnson AM, reviews recent developments and argues that:a.. Nuclear power provides less than 4% of UK energy – which is far less than could be saved by energy-efficiency measures that would cut people’s fuel bills.b.. New nuclear stations will not help the fight against climate change because major CO2 reductions are needed in the next ten years. New nuclear power stations could not be built fast enough.c.. Massive investment in renewables could deliver the necessary short-term CO2 cuts – but “feeding cash to the nuclear delusion” could help starve the renewables industry of some of the investment and skilled personnel it needs to grow rapidly.d.. The nuclear industry’s current financial problems cast serious doubt on its ability to deliver new power stations anyway. Darren Johnson, who is currently chair of the London Assembly and Green Party candidate for Lewisham Deptford, said today:
“The industry that was going to produce electricity ‘too cheap to meter’ has landed us with massive costs for handling its dangerous waste. Now the nuclear industry can’t even give us a reliable quote for the cost of a power station. The current projects in Finland and France are experiencing safety concerns, long delays and big overspends.
“There’s no point expecting nuclear to solve the climate crisis, because new stations couldn’t be built fast enough to help achieve the big CO2 reductions we need to make in the next ten years – which mature renewables could deliver.
“There is no point even considering nuclear power, because demand-reduction measures could easily save far more power than nuclear could generate. And the latest studies argue convincingly that green energy sources with a European smart grid could provide all the power we need.”
Another Green World: Nuclear power? No point, says new report
Don’t nuke the climate
International campaign “Don’t nuke the climate” : we need your support
Please answer before the 12th of July 2009.
Register your group
The first partners In December 2009, at the next UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, it will be the world leaders’ duty to aim for an ambitious agreement regarding greenhouse gas emissions cut targets. They should also agree on a relevant budget to finance climate change mitigation and adaptation.Nuclear power has been kept outside of climate change mitigation mechanisms like CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) and JI (Joint Implementation) so far. However, some evidence shows that the nuclear lobby could be preparing its comeback at the next COP to have this dirty energy labeled as clean or carbon-free and thus benefit from new subsidies. Will our leaders let themselves be talked into financing a dangerous, costly and irrelevant technology, which would divert urgently needed money from real solutions to climate change?
This is why we now propose you to support the international campaign “Don’t nuke the climate” which will be initiated by the Réseau “Sortir du nucléaire” (French Network for Nuclear Phase-out). A campaign document will be edited at a large scale (several hundreds of thousand copies) by September 2009. It will include petition postcards to be signed by citizens, which will be gathered and then presented in Copenhagen during a media-oriented action. Beside, we will ask citizens to send us pictures to make a huge mosaic showing the face(s) of world citizens’ refusal of nuke as a solution to global warming.
We would highly appreciate to see your logo on this document and on the dedicated website, our aim being to distribute this campaign as broadly as possible, not only in France, but also in Europe and maybe further. Our last campaign on this topic, in year 2008, has already gathered 27 partners at a national level. However, the issue is global and requires international committment. We know some of you are already active on the issue of nukes and global warming, and hope this campaign could contribute in joining our efforts to allow the antinuclear voice to be heard even stronger in Copenhagen.Like already many organizations, do not hesitate to register your NGO as a partner of the campaign “Don’t nuke the climate”The writing work is in progress and your remarks will be welcomed.
Seven proven policies that will help build a cleaner planet
Seven proven policies that will help build a cleaner planet
THE AUSTRALIAN Tony Blair | July 06, 2009 “……………………….A new report from the Breaking the Climate Deadlock project, a strategic partnership between my office and The Climate Group, shows how major reductions even by 2020 are achievable if we focus action on certain key technologies, deploy policies that have been proven to work, and invest now in developing those future technologies that will take time to mature.
Perhaps the most interesting fact to emerge is that fully 70 per cent of the reductions needed by 2020 can be achieved by investing in three areas: increasing energy efficiency, reducing deforestation, and use of lower-carbon energy sources, including nuclear and renewables. Implementing just seven proven policies – renewable energy standards (say, feed-in tariffs or renewable portfolio standards); industry efficiency measures; building codes; vehicle efficiency standards; fuel carbon content standards; appliance standards, and policies for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation – can deliver these reductions.All seven policies have already been successfully implemented in countries around the world, but they need scaling up.
Seven proven policies that will help build a cleaner planet | The Australian
France imports UK electricity as plants shut
July 3, 2009 France imports UK electricity as plants shut TIMESONLINE
France is being forced to import electricity from Britain to cope with a summer heatwave that has helped to put a third of its nuclear power stations out of action.
With temperatures across much of France surging above 30C this week, EDF’s reactors are generating the lowest level of electricity in six years, forcing the state-owned utility to turn to Britain for additional capacity.
Fourteen of France’s 19 nuclear power stations are located inland and use river water rather than seawater for cooling. When water temperatures rise, EDF is forced to shut down the reactors to prevent their casings from exceeding 50C.
Exxon still aids denialist lobby
Exxon still aids denialist lobby Sydney Morning Herald David Adam in London July 3, 2009
THE world’s largest oil company is continuing to fund lobby groups that question global warming, despite its public pledge to cut support for climate change denial.Company records show ExxonMobil gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to such lobby groups last year. These include the National Centre for Policy Analysis in Dallas, which received $75,000, and the Heritage Foundation in Washington, which received $50,000……………………….According to Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, the NCPA and Heritage Foundation have published “misleading and inaccurate information about climate change”…………………………The Heritage Foundation’s December “web memo” said: “Growing scientific evidence casts doubt on whether global warming constitutes a threat, including the fact that 2008 is about to go into the books as a cooler year than 2007.”……………………….Mr Ward said: “ExxonMobil has been briefing journalists for three years that they were going to stop funding these groups [but] … they are still doing it. If [it] wants to fund climate change denial then it should be upfront about it and not tell people it has stopped.”
Nuclear power problems remain
News.cincinatti.com Bill Cahalan • July 1, 2009 “……………..about Duke Energy’s plan for a nuclear plant in Piketon, Ohio,……………. many decision-makers appear motivated by fear of shortages (and for the nuclear industry, hunger for big profits) to return to this sleeping dog of nuclear electricity.
Despite some improvements in the technology, the following decades-old problems remain: air, water and human contamination from uranium mining, huge up-front construction (and later, decommissioning) costs, lengthy construction times, higher cancer rates and morbidity from other disorders in nearby residents due to routine radioactive releases, the continuing danger of meltdowns as occurred at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and almost at Davis-Besse in Toledo (2002), high vulnerability to terrorist attacks and the still unsolved problem of radioactive waste passed to our descendants for thousands of years.
I challenge the assumption that, in a world stressed by many transgressed ecological limits besides CO2 emissions, we must resign ourselves to continually increasing population, consumption and energy demands……………
……………..I for one plan to strive even harder now to unplug from Duke and turn to solar cells and conservation,…….
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090701/EDIT02/907010374/Nuclear+power+problems+remain
Heatwaves can crimp nuclear power output across Europe
— French temperatures have been at above 30 degrees Centigrade in some regions and are expected to remain at those levels until the end of the week. Forecasts show tempertures will dip by around 5 degrees next week.
— France, which relies on atomic power plants for 80 percent of its electricity, is especially vulnerable to heat waves. With 14 of its 19 nuclear plants located by rivers, rising temperatures over a longer period of time can trigger cooling problems due to local laws that prevent plants from discharging water in rivers above certain temperature levels.
— Lower output from reactors located near rivers because of cooling problems usually coincides with surging demand as people crank up air conditioners during the summer………………………
GERMANY
— Temperatures in Germany are running between 26 and 31 degrees Centigrade……………….- Some of the plants are on small rivers, which means the ability to draw cooling water from the rivers is reduced when water levels decline in heatwaves.
Heatwaves can crimp power output across Europe | Markets | Markets News | Reuters
Nuclear power is well-disguised fossil fuel
Nuclear power is well-disguised fossil fuel1 Mail and Guardian 30 June 09 …by Roger DiamondAs global warming gets hotter on the international political agenda, and with recent oil price volatility, the nuclear power proponents have jumped on a bandwagon to promote “the peaceful atom” as a means to power our society………………….. Carbon free? When uranium, or any other fissionable material, reacts, indeed, it does not give off any carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gases. However, almost every other aspect of the production of nuclear power does. Let’s start with mining uranium…………………All of this mining, processing and transporting activity uses energy — fossil fuels to be precise. But that’s not even the big energy user in nuclear power. The biggest factor is probably the building of the power stations that have to be over-engineered for terrorist strikes, earthquakes, careless operators………………………..the energy consumed in earth moving, making thousands of tons of cement and building a nuclear power station, is very significant. Maintenance of the power station also consumes energy, as does the transport and disposal of the low and medium-level radioactive waste, but the big unknowns in nuclear power are decommissioning and disposal of high-level nuclear waste.
All of this activity is driven by fossil fuels and so to say that nuclear power is carbon free is to pretend that nuclear power stations descend from the heavens and that fuel rods grow on trees, neither of which are particularly believable. It is also to ignore the challenge that decommissioning and high-level waste disposal pose………………………….he clincher is that all of this adds up to make nuclear power rather expensive and uncertain, and so the predicted boom in nuclear power has not materialised and in fact, the construction of new nuclear power stations is only keeping pace with the decommissioning of old ones built in the 1960s. This is even without the years of expense that we look forward to in guarding and maintaining radioactive hulks of concrete for the rest of civilisation so that they don’t crumble and leak radiation or demolishing the monstrosities and finding a hole to bury them in.
Thought Leader » Peak Oil Perspectives » Nuclear power is well-disguised fossil fuel
UN urges countries to boost clean development
UN urges countries to boost clean development http://www.chinaview.cn 2009-06-19 UNITED NATIONS, June 18 (Xinhua) — The United Nations on Thursday urged countries to invest more in renewable and clean energy sources which could help world mitigate climate change as well as defy global economic downturn.
At a UN General Assembly interactive thematic dialogue held here in the UN headquarters, UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann said that the time for renewable sources of energy has arrived.
“The prospects for renewable energy have never looked better, even in the face of recession,” D’Escoto told the meeting focusing on energy efficiency, energy conservation, and new and renewable sources of energy.
He said all the people, especially those are more vulnerable, hope to recover from the slump before too long. “It would be an enormous step forward if this recovery were coupled with visionary policies, innovative technologies and broad incentives for new and renewable sources of energy.”
UN urges countries to boost clean development_English_Xinhua
Renewable Energy Jobs Boom In Europe
Renewable Energy Jobs boom in Europe Energy Matters 17 June 09 A new study by the WWF has revealed that of the 130 million people employed in the European Union altogether, in excess of 3.4 million European jobs are directly related to renewable energy, sustainable transport and energy efficiency related goods and services – far more than the 2.8 million jobs in polluting industries. Indirect jobs related to the green collar sector are estimated at approximately another 5 million. Close to 400,000 people are employed specifically in renewable energy activities, such as the manufacturing, installation and maintenance of wind turbines and solar panels.
The leading European countries for wind power are Germany, Spain and Denmark. For solar power jobs, Germany and Spain are the front runners. Germany and Spain have or had generous gross feed in tariff programs that were major contributors to the solar power boom in both countries.
Germany, which experiences far less sunlight than countries such as Australia, is light years ahead in solar power uptake. Germany commands close to half the global installations market and is also a leading producer of solar cells.
Renewable Energy Jobs Boom In Europe : Renewable Energy News
1 This Month
PLEASE OPPOSE HR 8255 AND S.3639 – bills would accelerate satellite deployment, with no environmental review or safeguards – https://ncstd5li.quorum.us/campaign/169331/
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- October 2026 (39)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
