Halt the US-Philippines Nuclear Deal
Sign on to Letter to US Congress
Full statement and sign on: tinyurl.com/haltUSPHdeal
While thousands gathered in San Francisco to protest the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s presence at its meetings, United States Secretary of State Anthony Blinken signed a new Section 123 Nuclear Agreement with the Philippine Energy Secretary Raphael Lotilla. This agreement would allow the United States to export nuclear technology and material to Manila. Negotiations for the agreement began upon Kamala Harris’ November 2022 trip to the Philippines, making it the fastest Section 123 agreement ever signed, according to Blinken.
President Marcos Jr. portends the so-called “peaceful nuclear cooperation,” to be an alternative energy solution for the Philippines. The agreement must now go before the US Congress for approval.Here are five reasons why we must act now to oppose it:
- In a country already prone to climate disaster, vulnerable communities in the Philippines will be further at risk. Located in the notoriously active seismic zone known as the “ring of fire,” the Filipino people are among those that climate change and natural disasters most endanger, seen in the yearly typhoons and major disasters such as Typhoon Haiyan in 2013, which some estimate affected around 16 million people. History meanwhile provides no doubt about the potential disasters that can come with nuclear energy; we are already witness to the devastation caused by the nuclear accidents in Chernobyl and Fukushima. US-based nuclear companies are pivoting their projects to the Philippines, making the country a guinea pig for their untested and risky technologies.
2 Nuclear energy poses a threat to the health and safety of communities in the Philippines. Exposure to toxic nuclear waste is linked to increased rates of cancer, cardiovascular disease and other adverse health effects, particularly in sensitive populations including children. The Philippines is highly abundant in safer forms of renewable energy, and it is better to use precautionary principles than put already vulnerable communities at further risk. There is no confidence in the Philippine government to handle this type of radiation processing of energy, especially if they are privatized and the main objective is profit.
3 Fashioned in the style of the Marcos Sr. Dictatorship, this deal benefits only the US and Philippine elite. This is not the first attempt of the Philippine government to prioritize nuclear energy with the United States. Marcos Sr., following his declaration of Martial Law, worked with US companies to begin the building of the Bataan Nuclear Plant. The Bataan Plant, a point of protest for activists in the Philippines, quickly failed and was mothballed when the Marcos dictatorship, full of corruption and plundering of public funds for personal use, could not complete the construction. Now, Marcos Jr., known for his lavish spending on global travel, has sought to revive a nuclear project like his father’s to earn foreign investment. House of Representatives Member Mark Cojuangco, a billionaire and long-time supporter of the Marcos family, has been a proponent of nuclear projects. These families support said nuclear project because it benefits their widespread power over land and profit in the Philippines Creating a deal with the US and foreign corporations will serve their business interests, not those of the Filipino people. For the US and US based corporations, it gives the opportunity to control and profit further from the resources in the Philippines, a country which, since 2022, has allowed 100 percent foreign ownership over “clean” energy projects.
4 The so-called “peaceful transfer” of nuclear materials thwarts the Filipino people’s right to peace, development and self-determination. Known as the deadliest country for land defenders, environmental activists, indigenous people, farmers and people in rural areas of the Philippines are currently facing brutal attacks under the Marcos’ counterinsurgency program – recently documented by UN Special Rapporteur Ian Fry. In its attempts to squash the CPP-NPA-NDF, the Marcos regime has continued the US-designed counterinsurgency policy of Duterte and many presidents before him that result in the militarization of indigenous and rural communities, indiscriminate aerial bombings, forced surrender of civilians and mass displacement of people from their homelands. At the roots of the armed conflict in the Philippines is the Filipino people’s struggle for land and sustainable, national development, free from foreign intervention and control. The transfer of nuclear materials paves the way for more displacement of indigenous people, land grabbing for the sake of foreign corporations and further militarization of the countryside. The potential monopoly of foreign ownership over energy in the Philippines further aggravates the people’s aspiration to control and determine the development of their own economy. The US agreement with the Marcos regime gives further approval of Marcos’s policies and rewards his family for their ongoing plunder and exploitation of the Filipino people.5 As tensions with China escalate, the storage of nuclear materials will set a precedent for the US to allow a nuclear arsenal to be stored in the Philippines. The required technology and infrastructure for facilities to hold nuclear materials will open up the door for conversations to allow for the potential storage of US nuclear weapons on Philippine soil. President Marcos has already allowed the ongoing Kamandag war game exercises between the US, Philippines, South Korea, and Japan, only serving to escalate tensions in the region and drag the Philippines into conflict between the US and China. By allowing the US to store nuclear materials in the Philippines, Marcos is setting the stage to welcome US nuclear weapons as an opportunity to advance his foreign affairs relationship with US President Biden.
For these reasons, we, members of the Filipino community and allies in solidarity, demand that members of US Congress halt the Section 123 US-PH Nuclear Deal.
Nuclear energy in Philippines? Group says there’s not even a Filipino expert on safety, radiation.
By: Cristina Eloisa Baclig – Content Researcher Writer / @inquirerdotnet, INQUIRER.net / 03:08 PM November 27, 2023
MANILA, Philippines—In a convergence of scientific and environmental dissent, progressive groups, scientists, and climate activists expressed strong opposition to the newly signed nuclear deal between the Philippines and the United States (US).
Last Nov. 17, Energy Secretary Raphael Lotilla and US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken signed the 123 agreement, or the “peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement,” on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Cooperation (Apec) Summit.
It took a year to negotiate the breakthrough agreement between the two countries. Blinken described it as “the fastest that the United States has ever negotiated this kind of agreement.”
The deal, which awaits approval by the US Congress, establishes a legally binding framework allowing the transfer of nuclear material and the export of nuclear fuel, reactors, and equipment from the US to the Philippines…………………………
A ‘reckless decision’
The group Advocates of Science and Technology for the People (AGHAM) said the government’s decision to “impulsively” enter into the agreement was a “reckless decision that lacks careful consideration.”
The group explained that despite its promised and expected benefits, there is still no detailed study on whether nuclear power is necessary and appropriate for the country.
“This omission leaves the Marcos administration without a solid foundation to justify their nuclear aspirations, as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) emphasizes the importance of such studies in assessing a country’s needs and potential for nuclear energy,” the group added.
AGHAM argued that nuclear energy will only worsen the energy crisis in the country, where, according to the group, other indigenous sources of energy remain largely untapped or with inefficient and incomplete distribution systems.
It also described the agreement as “dangerously premature,” considering that the science and technology sector in the country remains severely underfunded and understaffed.
“To illustrate, as of this moment, there is no Filipino expert in nuclear safety or in radiological environmental impact assessment in the country,” the group explained.
“This means that we will have to disproportionately rely on the US nuclear regulatory mechanism, which will lead to us being clueless guinea pigs for their new nuclear technologies; since we do not have our own way of technically assessing future implementations.”
Not a solution for clean energy security
President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., who witnessed the signing of the pact, said the deal would ensure a “more energy secure and green Philippines.”
“We see nuclear energy becoming a part of the Philippine energy mix by 2032, and we would be more than happy to pursue this path with the United States as one of our partners,” said Marcos Jr. in a speech.
“The signing of the Philippines-United States Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, or the 123 Agreement, is the first major step in this regard, taking our cooperation on capacity building further and actually opening the doors for U.S. companies to invest and participate in nuclear power projects in the country,” he added.
However, according to the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ), the 123 Agreement poses a threat by acquiring risky nuclear technologies, misleadingly promoted as a remedy for clean energy security.
“[T]he agreement’s purported benefits are debunked. Nuclear energy, touted for clean energy, releases pollutants worsening the planet’s temperature. The resulting radioactive waste persists for years, often irresponsibly dumped or stored, lacking proper technology for disposal,” PMCJ said in a statement.
PMCJ said that it “vehemently opposes nuclear energy in the country, advocating for a shift towards sustainable solutions.”
Despite the supposed benefits, the International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines (ICHRP-US), along with progressive groups — Bayan USA, Malaya Movement USA, Kabataan Alliance — demanded that members of the US Congress halt the nuclear deal, citing five reasons:
- In a country already prone to climate disaster, vulnerable communities in the Philippines will be further at risk.
- Nuclear energy poses a threat to the health and safety of communities in the Philippines.
- Fashioned in the style of the Marcos Sr. regime, this deal benefits only the US and Philippine elite.
- The so-called “peaceful transfer” of nuclear materials thwarts the Filipino people’s right to peace, development, and self-determination.
- As tensions with China escalate, the storage of nuclear materials will set a precedent for the US to allow a nuclear arsenal to be stored in the Philippines.
Renewable vs nuclear energy
Both PMCJ and AGHAM questioned Marcos Jr. and his administration’s plans to use more renewable energy while also pushing for the use of nuclear power……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
“As with his other policies, this will just be an edifice to be used as a talking point for the purposes of extending the Marcoses’ cling to power; with no real positive contribution, and even potentially dangerous, to the Filipino people,” the group continued.
Environmental group Greenpeace Philippines has previously called out Marcos Jr. for showing mixed signals on his stance on energy.
“He used renewable energy when he ran for president, and continues to talk about it like he means it, but it’s all a game of pretend. If you look at his actions, he’s actually out to promote nuclear energy and fossil gas–both of which will block major RE development,” said Greenpeace Philippines country director Lea Guerrero.
“Greenpeace believes this is climate hypocrisy at its most dangerous,” she added.
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1866612/nuclear-energy-in-ph-group-says-theres-not-even-a-filipino-expert-on-safety-radiation#ixzz8KL4mjfe6
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
South Texans are publicly fighting SpaceX after second Starship launch
Starship’s second launch brought more outcry from local organizations.
Chron, By Andrea Guzmán, Nov 22, 2023
SpaceX’s second launch attempt of its Starship rocket on Saturday has been commended for its improvement from the first launch, which ended with the rocket exploding after reaching 24 miles into the air.
But for some South Texas residents, SpaceX’s operations are not a cause for celebration.
In a press release after Saturday’s launch, South Texas organizations said that local residents again experienced their homes shaking and debris falling on the community.
“Musk and his pet vanity project continue to pollute and destroy our beautiful beach, coastline, and wildlife. SpaceX, an unnecessary, private money grab that only serves the wealthy, refuses to follow safety regulations, environmental regulations, and the wishes of local communities and the original people of the land,” said Christopher Basaldú with South Texas Environmental Justice Network.
Meanwhile, grassroots collaborative Another Gulf Is Possible, which has members from Brownsville, Texas, to Pensacola, Florida, has invited the public to a documentary screening in Brownsville about community objection to SpaceX on Dec. 1. The film will explore how Brownsville residents and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas have battled “the encroachment of SpaceX on pristine lands,” an event invitation says. The documentary will also look at how South Texans have fought against two proposed LNG projects. ……………………………………………………………………………………… Next Friday’s documentary screening will be held at Brownsville’s Rio Bravo Office Space from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.
more https://www.chron.com/culture/article/texas-starship-second-launch-18508949.php—
Council urged to review plans that could lead to UK hosting US nuclear bombs
An attempt by the Ministry of Defence to build a dormitory that could lead
to the return of US nuclear weapons to British soil is being challenged by
the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) because it is being attempted
without planning permission.
The campaign group has asked West Suffolk
council to intervene and insist that the planned 144-bed facility at RAF
Lakenheath be subject to an environmental impact assessment or be halted.
Work on the dormitory is due to start next year and its purpose is to house
the extra US personnel who would be needed to safeguard any return of B-61
air-launched nuclear bombs to Lakenheath for the first time since 2007.
Kate Hudson, CND’s general secretary, accused the US air force of
ploughing ahead by “purportedly relying on planning rights that assume
that the development won’t have significant environmental effects”, and
so ignoring the risks that storing nuclear weapons in Suffolk would entail.
Guardian 14th Nov 2023
Anti-Nuclear Activist Goes on Trial Amid the Fallout of Oppenheimer’s LegacyKansas City’s Ties To The Bomb
Flatland, Clarence Dennis, cdennis@flatlandkc.org 10 Nov 23
At time zero the first thing I noticed was that although facing away from ground zero, it felt like someone had slapped my face: it was of course the heat radiation from a most successful test.”Hugh Richards, Ph.D., “Through Los Alamos, 1945: Memoirs of a Nuclear Physicist”
Last month, Ann Suellentrop, 71, stood before a judge in the 16th Judicial Court of Missouri.
A retired maternal-child nurse and lifelong activist, Suellentrop was one of three people arrested for trespassing during a Memorial Day protest organized by PeaceWorks KC at the National Security Campus of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in south Kansas City earlier this year.
The only property line crosser who would plead not guilty, Suellentrop represented herself in court on Oct. 25. She argued that intentionally crossing the alleged boundary line by 10 feet or less, approximately three-fourths of a mile from the NNSA facility, was not trespass, but a peaceful, “limited protest” on a matter of principle and should not result in fines or jail time.
Facing a $500 fine, six months in jail, or both, the defendant argued her action was an expression of her First Amendment rights and stressed that advanced notice and planning of the annual protest was communicated to police and NNSA campus officials.
In front of more than a dozen supporters sporting bold black stickers that read “NO NUKES Y’ALL,” Suellentrop raised points to Judge Anne LaBella about her own character, the nature of her peaceful protest and the threats nuclear weapons and nuclear terrorism pose to human health and society.
Facing a slew of objections based on relevance and witness testimony from the NNSA campus security guard who was on duty during the protest and warned the protesters to step off the property, all signs pointed to a guilty verdict.
Moments after all arguments were heard and the city rested its case, the prosecutor asked the judge to amend the charge to include NNSA campus administrator Honeywell Federal Manufacturing and Technologies.
Judge LaBella said the request came too late and she would not amend the charge. She then promptly announced her ruling on Suellentrop’s case.
Not guilty.
Modern-Day Peaceniks
A member of PeaceWorks KC and the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Suellentrop has been arrested twice before in protests at the NNSA campus. The facility manufactures 80% of the non-nuclear components that go into the national nuclear stockpile……..
“Our ultimate goal is to convert the plant into a peaceful production of hopefully something that can fight the environmental crisis that’s going on. We need those brains, those skills and that money to convert it into something we really need,” Suellentrop said ahead of the trial.
Immediately following the verdict, Suellentrop and her peacenik partners picked up where her testimony left off. The group of mostly older adults gathered outside of the Jackson County Courthouse, taking turns passing a child’s toy microphone, celebrating the win and speaking about the threat nuclear weapons present to anyone who would listen.
“Because there is a group of old people, it doesn’t mean we are wrong. Historically, civil disobedience has played a big role in changing things,” said PeaceWorks KC board chair Chris Mann.
Mann, 73, participated in her first protest in college – a silent vigil during the war in Vietnam.
“Our group is becoming increasingly younger… a tradition of civil disobedience is only one of the measures,” Mann said, speaking to the makeup of PeaceWorks KC. “We think that younger people have a hard way to go now.”…………………………………….
The experience, plus an admiration for Australian physician, author and anti-nuclear advocate Helen Caldicot, fueled a lifetime of activism for Suellentrop, particularly in anti-nuclear efforts.
As for what keeps her civil disobedience going into her 70s, Suellentrop points to her faith.
“Like any person, I have fears and worries and self-doubts and what have you, but I just go to God and prayer,” Suellentrop said. “I get an overwhelming feeling of, ‘I got this.’ God is good and he’s opposing this – and this is an unspeakable evil.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://flatlandkc.org/news-issues/anti-nuclear-activist-goes-on-trial-amid-the-fallout-of-oppenheimers-legacy/
20 years after campaign began, the fight to ban deadly depleted uranium weapons goes on
Yesterday (6 November) marked the 20th anniversary of the founding of the
International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons, and, with depleted uranium
(DU) weapons recently deployed to the battlefields of Ukraine, the Nuclear
Free Local Authorities want to highlight the aims of the coalition as its
important work for a global ban continues into a third decade.
NFLA 7th Nov 2023
Worldwide protests against Israel’s ethnic cleansing in Palestine
BY OLEG CETINIC AND FATIMA HUSSEIN, 10, November 5, 2023
WASHINGTON (AP) — From Washington to Milan to Paris, tens of thousands of pro-Palestinian demonstrators marched Saturday, calling for a halt to Israel’s bombardment of Gaza.
The marches reflected growing disquiet about the mounting civilian casualty toll and suffering from the Israel-Hamas war. Protesters, particularly in countries with large Muslim populations, including the U.S., U.K. and France, expressed disillusionment with their governments for supporting Israel while its bombardments of hospitals and residential areas in the Gaza strip intensify.
The Palestinian death toll in the Israel-Hamas war has reached 9,448, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry in Gaza. In Israel, more than 1,400 people have been killed, most of them in the Oct. 7 Hamas attack that started the war.
In the U.S., thousands converged on the nation’s capital to protest the Biden administration’s support of Israel and its continued military campaign in Gaza. “Palestine will be free,” demonstrators donning black and white keffiyehs chanted as an enormous Palestinian flag was unfurled by a crowd that filled Pennsylvania Avenue — the street leading up to the White House.
Leveling direct criticism of President Joe Biden, Renad Dayem of Cleveland said she made the trip with her family so her children would know “the Palestinian people are resilient — and we want a leader who won’t be a puppet to the Israeli government.”
Dozens of small white body bags with the names of children killed by Israeli missiles lined the street and demonstrators held signs calling for an immediate cease-fire……………………. more https://apnews.com/article/israel-gaza-palestinians-protests-europe-193a9aaca97df2c5c6a515f756a40a34 #Israel #Palestine
Nuclear Ban Treaty Members to Meet in November
Arms Control Association, November 2023, By Shizuka Kuramitsu
States-parties to the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) will hold their second meeting in New York on Nov. 27-Dec. 1. Amid the crisis facing the international arms control and disarmament regime, they are expected to review and continue implementing their plans for a total ban on nuclear weapons.
The TPNW, which entered into force on Jan. 22, 2021, bans states-parties from involvement in any nuclear weapons activities, including the use, threat of use, production, development, possession, and stationing of these weapons. Spearheaded by non-nuclear-armed states and civil society groups, the treaty originated from their frustration over the long stalemate among nuclear-weapon states to engage in serious nuclear disarmament as called for by the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).
At their first meeting, in June 2022, TPNW states-parties produced two documents aiming to advance the treaty, a 50-point action plan and a political statement. (See ACT, July/August 2022.)
They established three informal working groups to make progress during the intercessional period on important topics such as nuclear disarmament verification, victim assistance, environmental remediation, and universalization of the treaty. In addition, the action plan agreed to create a scientific advisory group, to implement gender provisions in the treaty, and to promote TPNW complementarity with existing treaties.
For the November meeting, each working group is preparing reports on their respective intersessional activities. The meeting is expected to issue a final document, according to the provisional agenda and government officials……………………………………………………… more https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2023-11/news/nuclear-ban-treaty-members-meet-november #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes
The Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) steps up drive to keep U.S. military expansion out of Australia
By Bevan Ramsden | 26 October 2023 https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/ipan-steps-up-drive-to-keep-us-military-expansion-out-of-australia,18020
The Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) has produced a petition opposing the Force Posture Agreement (FPA) which is enabling U.S. militarisation of Australia in preparation for the U.S. to support/launch war from the Australian continent against China.
The e-petition to Parliament is an instrument for peace calling for the termination of the FPA.
It can be signed HERE.
The devastation of war, currently in Ukraine and in Palestine, confronts us on TV on a daily basis. All peace-loving people cry out for a ceasefire on both war fronts to enable, hopefully under United Nations auspices, conferences of all affected parties to find solutions that meet the security needs of all parties and free non-combatants from the horrors of war.
But concern about these wars should not blind us to the preparations for war occurring on our own continent under the auspices of the United States and with the enthusiastic complicity of successive Australian governments.
When defence matters are discussed, much is made of the U.S.-Australia alliance. But when the U.S. militarisation of Australia is considered, the alliance pales into insignificance compared to the U.S.-Australia FPA. It emerged as a concept from former President Barack Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” of the U.S. armed forces, in which he announced the stationing of U.S. marines in Darwin each year to train for war with our Defence Force.
The “Pivot” was a strategy designed to “contain” China and maintain U.S. hegemony in the Asia/Pacific area. President Obama’s concept was enthusiastically received by all politicians of both major parties.
Subsequently, the Gillard and Abbott Governments, in conjunction with their U.S. defence counterparts, produced a greatly expanded concept, the FPA, providing “an operational posture” for U.S. forces in Australia, a gateway for U.S. militarisation of Australia. It was signed by the Abbott Government and the United States Government in 2014.
The FPA:
- facilitates the stationing in Darwin, for six months each year, of up to 2,500 U.S. Marines; they are trained and equipped for immediate deployment and while in Australia, train for war in exercises with the Australian Defence Force. They are not under the control of the Australian Government. They are under the control of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command;
- facilitates unimpeded access to Australia’s airfields and airport facilities for U.S. fighter planes and bombers including the stationing of up to six B-52 bombers at RAAF Base Tindall. B-52 bombers were used to devastate Vietnam in that war and some are capable of carrying nuclear weapons;
- facilitates unimpeded access to Australia’s seaports for U.S. naval vessels including their nuclear submarines at HMAS Stirling in WA;
- facilitates the establishment of storage facilities for aircraft fuel, spare parts and munitions under U.S. military control. This includes huge fuel storage facilities at East Arm, Darwin and logistics facilities for storage of equipment, munitions and spare parts at Bandiana in Victoria;
- opened the door for the embedding of U.S. military intelligence operatives within the Australian defence intelligence organisation now called the Combined Intelligence Centre — Australia; and
- under the FPA, a U.S. command centre has been established in Darwin to control U.S. aircraft operations and another command centre in Darwin to control U.S. marine operations.
In short, the U.S. could launch and control military operations from Australia.
I have stressed the words “unimpeded access” because they are the words used in the Agreement.
Article IV of the FPA states:
…United States Forces and United States Contractors shall have unimpeded access to and use of Agreed Facilities and Areas for activities undertaken in connection with this Agreement.
Australia hereby grants to the United States operational control of Agreed Facilities and Areas…
Part 4 of Article VII states:
‘As mutually determined by the Parties, aircraft, vehicles, and vessels operated by or for United States Forces shall have access to aerial ports and seaports of Australia and other locations, for the delivery to, storage and maintenance in, and removal from the territory of Australia of United States Forces’ prepositioned materiel.’
Activities under Article IV include:
‘…training, transit, support, and related activities; refuelling of aircraft; bunkering of vessels; temporary maintenance of vehicles, vessels, and aircraft; temporary accommodation of personnel; communications; prepositioning of equipment, supplies, and materiel; deploying forces and material; and such other activities as the Parties may agree.’
Summing up, the FPA, with the enthusiastic support of the Australian Government, is facilitating increased U.S. militarisation of Australia to support U.S. military operations in the Indo-Pacific from which it could launch or support a war against China. This has been done with the agreement of both major political parties.
The FPA lasts 25 years from the date of signing but has a clause facilitating termination if either party gives one year’s notice.
IPAN is campaigning to have this FPA terminated. This would be a strong step in the direction of keeping Australia out of another U.S. war. And this time, one which would have a catastrophic impact on the Australian people.
If you wish to join this campaign, IPAN has a parliamentary e-petition which is open until 15 November 2023 for signature and it can be accessed by using your mobile phone and this QR code. [on original] #nuclear #antinuclear #NoNukes
Welsh campaigners call for nuclear sponsorship ban at National Eisteddfod.
The National Eisteddfod has peace at its heart and Welsh anti-nuclear
campaigners have registered a formal complaint with its governing body
protesting the acceptance of sponsorship money from the companies
Westinghouse and Cwmni Egino at this year’s event despite the clear links
between nuclear power and nuclear weapons.
A letter endorsed by eight campaign groups and the Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities has been sent today (24 October), on the first day of the United Nations’ Disarmament
Week, to the Eisteddfod Council calling on it not to accept ‘any future
sponsorship from any company engaged in developing nuclear power and the
manufacture of weapons, especially armaments of mass destruction.’
NFLA 24th Oct 2023 #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes
Keep Space For Peace: Croughton US Base, 7 October 2023
#nuclear #antinuclear #NuclearFree #NoNukes #NuclearPlants
PETITION: Stop calling uranium mined fuels “clean energy”
Scrap the rebranding of nuclear as “clean.” Even the very first step of the fuel cycle, the mining of Uranium is uniquely dirty and dangerous. The extraction of a finite resource which is far from “home grown.”
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero announced in July that “The UK’s nuclear renaissance begins with the launch of Great British Nuclear helping us deliver clean, reliable energy for generations to come.”
Future generations are being dangerously misled about the main product of nuclear power – nuclear waste. This will be just as dangerous to their lives as it is to ours. Using Greenhouse Gas Protocol methodology, the total NDA (Nuclear Decommissioning Authority) group carbon footprint for 2019/20 is 1,046,950 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)”. We believe much of this is indirectly looking after radioactive wastes at Sellafield………… #nuclear #antinuclear #NuclearFree #NoNukes #NuclearPlants
14 October 12-2pm ET Join Us WARHEADS TO WINDMILLS – ONLINE FORUM
https://www.nuclearban.us/join-us-warheads-to-windmills-online-forum-october-14th-12-2pm-et/
Abolishing Nuclear Weapons and Fossil Fuels: What will it take? #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
Following a webinar on May 7th which brought together leading organizations and activists working on the two crucially important issues of climate change and nuclear war, this forum will allow for more in depth discussion on how the climate and nuclear weapons movements can work together to save the planet from these existential threats before it is too late. Merging these into an inclusive mass movement in the transition to a greener economy is essential!
An online forum with speakers on climate solutions, nuclear solutions, and a panel on how we can help each other build a strong and inclusive movement. Followed by breakout rooms to share ideas on action.
Speakers and Schedule: all times listed in ET…………………………………………………………………
Environmentalists suffer another setback in fight to shutter California’s last nuclear power plant
MICHAEL R. BLOOD, Thu, October 5, 2023 https://news.yahoo.com/environmentalists-suffer-another-setback-fight-215942686.html
#nuclear #anti-nuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Federal regulators Wednesday rejected a request from two environmental groups to immediately shut down one of two reactors at California’s last nuclear power plant.
Friends of the Earth and Mothers for Peace said in a petition filed last month with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that long-postponed tests needed to be conducted on critical machinery at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, located midway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. They argued the equipment could fail and cause a catastrophe.
In an order dated Tuesday, the NRC took no action on the request to immediately shut down the Unit 1 reactor and instead asked agency staff to review it.
The NRC also rejected a request to convene a hearing to reconsider a 2003 decision by staff to extend the testing schedule for the Unit 1 pressure vessel until 2025. The vessels are thick steel containers that hold nuclear fuel and cooling water in the reactors.
According to the groups, the last inspections on the vessel took place between 2003 and 2005. The utility postponed further testing in favor of using results from similar reactors to justify continued operations, they said.
The commission found there was no justification for a hearing.
The groups said in a statement that the decision showed “a complete lack of concern for the safety and security of the people living near” the plant, which started operating in the mid-1980s.
Operator Pacific Gas & Electric had said the plant was in “full compliance” with industry guidance and regulatory standards for monitoring and evaluating the safety of the reactor vessels.
The petition marked the latest development in a long fight over the operation and safety of the seaside plant, which sits on a bluff above the Pacific Ocean. In August, a state judge rejected a lawsuit filed by Friends of the Earth that sought to block PG&E from seeking to extend the operating life of the plant.
PG&E agreed in 2016 to shutter the plant by 2025, but at the direction of the state changed course and now intends to seek a longer operating run for the twin reactors. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who once was a leading voice to close the plant, said last year that Diablo Canyon’s power is needed beyond 2025 to ward off possible blackouts as California transitions to solar and other renewable energy sources.
Protesters call on Scottish Government to withdraw spaceport support
By Ross Hunter@_Ross_Hunter, Multimedia Journalist, 4 Oct 23 #nuclear #NoNukes #anti-nuclear #nuclear-free
CAMPAIGNERS are calling on the Scottish Government to withdraw support for new spaceports in Scotland.
Protesters from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and Drone Wars UK appeared outside Holyrood on Tuesday to highlight concerns about the environmental impact of the facilities and their role in bolstering militarism.
There are currently plans for at least five new spaceports in Scotland.
However, campaigners drew particular attention to three: the Saxa Vord spaceport in Unst, Shetland; the Orbex spaceport on the A’Mhoine peninsula in Sutherland; and a spaceport in North Uist being proposed by Comhairle nan Eilean Siar in conjunction with private military contractor QinetiQ.
Lynn Jamieson, the chair of the Scottish CND, said all the projects posed a threat to biodiversity.
She told The National: “The places where these rockets are set to be launched are very fragile ecosystems………………………..
“It is still carbon-based and putting it into the upper atmosphere will contribute to climate change, too.
“Taken over by militarism”
The Scottish Government has previously said that spaceports represent a “great opportunity”.
Indeed, ministers say that the country is well-placed to become “a leading European space nation”.
But Scottish Greens MSP Maggie Chapman said that the industry in Scotland must not be permitted to prop up an increasingly militarised view of space……………………………………
A code of space ethics
Last year, the UK Government published its Defence Space Strategy and described space as the fifth operational domain of the military alongside cyber, maritime, air and land.
The report vowed to increase military spending – which has already increased by more than £8 billion since 2020 – in order to “protect and defend our national interests in and through space”.
The UK Space Agency has also said that spaceport facilities are vital for the launch of satellites to collect data on climate change.
But Peter Burt from the campaign group Drone Wars UK told The National that a code of space ethics must be drawn up before the spaceports begin accepting contracts from the Ministry of Defence.
“The fact is that a lot of spaceport investment is military investment,” he said.
“We already know we are in real trouble with climate change; we don’t need more data to tell us that – we need action to stop it.
“The UK Space Agency, instead of greenwashing its projects, needs to come up with a code of space ethics and use that to govern the kinds of projects it invests in.”
The campaigners have appealed to the Scottish Parliament’s cross-party group on nuclear disarmament to support their calls for the Scottish Government to oppose rather than support spaceports………………………………. https://www.thenational.scot/news/23831188.protesters-call-scottish-government-withdraw-spaceport-support/
-
Archives
- May 2026 (72)
- April 2026 (356)
- 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)
-
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 
