nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

German protests against Framatome’s nuclear fuel production in Lingen.

Stratera Media Group 25 Apr 23

Shortly before the shutdown of the Emsland nuclear power plant, anti-nuclear activists in Lingen held a protest for the final rejection of nuclear power in Germany. At noon on Saturday, opponents of nuclear power gathered in front of the ANF fuel cell plant, which is owned by the French Framatome group. A representative of the AgiEL – AtomkraftgegnerInnen im Emsland alliance spoke about about 300 demonstrators gathered. A police official gave a preliminary estimate of about 100 participants………………..

The protest of opponents of nuclear energy is held under the motto: “Anyone who talks about abandoning nuclear power should also close the fuel cell production plant!” A joint venture between Framatome and the Russian state-owned Rosatom, which wants to produce fuel rods for Eastern European nuclear power plants in Lingen, was recently criticized. The relevant application is currently being reviewed by the Lower Saxony Nuclear Supervision Authority.

“Such cooperation is scandalous and politically irresponsible,” Susanna Gerstner, chairman of the Bundestag of Germany (Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, BUND) from the state of Lower Saxony, said in a statement. “We urgently call on the responsible Minister of Environment and Energy, Christian Mayer, to reject the current application of the operating company to expand production!” According to her, the federal and state governments should commit to a consistent phase-out of nuclear power, which also includes shutting down the Lingen fuel cell plant.

The fuel cell plant’s operator, ANF, has rejected calls for the plant to close. “Framatome Advanced Nuclear Fuels (ANF) has an unlimited operating license. The plant has been producing fuel elements with a high level of safety for more than 45 years and always complies with all legal requirements and procedures, ” the company explained to Deutsche Presse-Agentur.

April 17, 2023 Posted by | Germany, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Nuclear storage dump opponents sweep into Theddlethorpe parish council

Residents have organised against storage plans

The Lincolnite, By Daniel Jaines Local Democracy Reporter 13 Apr 23

Candidates opposing a nuclear storage dump have surged to power in Theddlethorpe in a demonstration of local opposition.

Eight of the ten seats on two Theddlethorpe Parish Councils – St Helen’s and All Saints – have been filled uncontested by people against to Nuclear Waste Service’s plans for a Geological Disposal Facility in the village.

Nearby residents were in uproar after it was announced last year that the Theddlethorpe Gas Terminal could become the entry point for a nuclear storage facility to dispose of around 10% of the UK’s nuclear waste.

The new councillors, who will automatically become councillors after the May 4 local elections, are all part of Theddlethorpe Residents Association.

Members Brian Swift and Andrew Spink formed it after their application to join the parish councils were rejected in 2021.

Mr Swift said: “We were both turned down, but shortly after this we got together with a few neighbours and formed the Theddlethorpe Residents Association with the aim to give the parish a collective voice and to counter the PC’s negative stance.”

Since its inception, the residents association has garnered more than 120 members and holds regular events.

However, Mr Swift said the anti-GDF sentiment of the members would not mean other views would be unwelcome.

“Despite the fact that the majority of the councillors are now anti-GDF ,we are keen to stress that all points of view are welcome. Our priorities are to carry out the parish council’s functions to the best of our ability and to do our utmost to see that the village thrives and continues to be the friendly, united place we all call home,” he said………………………. more https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2023/04/nuclear-storage-dump-opponents-sweep-into-theddlethorpe-parish-council/—

i

April 15, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, politics, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Saskatchewan must remember opposition to nuclear waste

A reader wants Saskatchewan people to recall a protest against nuclear waste 12 years ago now that nuclear power is being debated.

Don Kossick, Saskatoon, Apr 09, 2023  https://thestarphoenix.com/opinion/letters/letter-saskatchewan-must-remember-opposition-to-nuclear-waste

The recent 2023 federal budget showed clear support for small modular nuclear reactors or SMRs. It introduces a new 15 per cent refundable clean electricity investment tax credit.

Nuclear projects — both large-scale and SMRs — are eligible for the credit, which is available to both new projects and the refurbishment of existing facilities.

For Saskatchewan, it emboldens government, universities, institutions and uranium companies that have been pressuring for SMRs to be built in Saskatchewan.

With the SMRs will come the push for nuclear waste sites in Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, there is a short memory about the response of many communities in northern Saskatchewan who have rejected nuclear waste sites.

A north to south, community to community walk of 800 kilometres was organized in 2011, by the northern based Committee for Our Future Generations that opposed nuclear waste sites and presented the concerns of northern and southern communities to the Saskatchewan legislature.

The consideration of a nuclear waste dump site at Creighton was officially withdrawn by the federal Nuclear Waste Management Organization in 2015. The Creighton area had “geological complexities.”

The nuclear consortium and their friends need to back off trying to impose energy sources such as nuclear power that has its own deadly impact and is not sustainable.

Our governments need to put monies into renewable, sustainable alternatives that do not involve ripping up and polluting the environment for, in some cases, hundreds upon hundreds of years.

April 10, 2023 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

8 peaceful protestors arrested at the Nevada National “Security” Site

Nonviolent Activism, North America

By Nevada Desert Experience, April 8, 2023  https://worldbeyondwar.org/8-arrested-at-the-nevada-national-security-site/

On Good Friday, April 7, 2023 , 8 concerned citizens were arrested and cited for trespass at the Nevada National “Security” Site insisting on nuclear weapons abolition.   On April 10, 2023 Brian Terrell and John Amidon will  appear in Beatty Justice Court for trespass citations from October 2022.

The NDE Sacred Peace Walk  engaged the Department of Energy and the Nye County Sheriff’s department in  dialogue and civil resistance.  Jacques Linder, Philadelphia, PA, Richard Bishop, Missoula, MT, Sylver Pondolfino, Staten Island, NY, Tessa Epstein, Salt Lake City, Utah, Mark Babson, Salem, Oregon, George Killingsworth,  Berkeley, CA, Theo Kayser, St. Louis, MO, Catherine Hourcade, Stockton, CA were arrested,  cited for trespass and released at the NNSS.

Mark Babson said “I felt the arresting officers were listening to us. It is so vital we continue this work because we have the ability to make a significant choice that will effect the survival of our species and that of other living beings.”

Brian Terrell and John Amidon  will appear in Beatty Justice Court, Monday morning for previous trespass citations at the NNSS from last October, 2022. Both have pleaded not guilty as both had permission and land use permits from the Western Shoshone National Council, the legal owners  of this land.

April 10, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, USA | Leave a comment

Four arrested after blockade of two gates at Trident nuclear base in Scotland

Posted on April 6, 202, by Margaret Ferguson Burns  http://www.nukeresister.org/2023/04/06/four-arrested-after-blockade-of-two-gates-at-trident-nuclear-base-in-scotland/?fbclid=IwAR0_QXUS6bh8GFYojhTTaBg7cF7qqXkt2NTNnuDBjGJUVg92m7CVSfxUc_M

This morning, 5th April – an early start and a fine action.

Lying in a lock-on, enjoying the sounds of the gate sliding shut behind us, the warning klaxon overhead, high above the electrified, barbed wire topped main entrance to HMNB Clyde (home of the UK’s nuclear powered and armed submarines of mass destruction) – and the merry call of “Bandit Alarm; North Gate closed; traffic within the base divert to…” blaring out from the loudspeakers.

The heavy rain splashing chill on our faces in the dull coldness, and creeping through the many layers of clothing.

Clad in an International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) “Nuclear Weapons ARE BANNED” banner (what else could it be?).

And a little later the even merrier message of “Both North and South Gates now closed – all traffic use the Fire Engine Gate” – loudly hailed into the air. So the second team in successful lock-on too.

And then a Ministry of Defence police truck arriving with blue lights flashing; and the cutting crew truck appearing on the scene too.

So it was, for two lock-on teams from Faslane Peace Camp – the four arrested (Alexander, Finlay, Willemien, Margaret), handcuffed and taken off to Clydebank Polis Station (still wearing the ICAN banner through check-in at the Sergeant’s desk – aye). And it’ll be off to Dumbarton Sherriff Court in the morning.

All to protest the UK Government’s plans to provide depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine in its defence against the Russian invasion – it’s known to cause leukaemia, birth defects and much more.

Success was enabled by welfare support from other camp members during the action; and tasty hot food and a blazing hot stove on return to camp late – after release on signing an “Undertaking” to appear in court next day (including the acceptance of various conditions until then e.g. not to go within 20 metres of the base). 

[Update – All four activists were out by late afternoon, Thursday, 6th April – court proceedings to follow at some point.]

April 10, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Campaigners continue to take a stand against the plan for new nuclear power at Bradwell

CAMPAIGNERS have promised to continue to protect the people and
environment until a village site is ruled out for use as a nuclear power
site. The Government has said it is “committed to a programme of new
nuclear projects beyond Sizewell C”.

The current government nuclear
policy statement identifies Bradwell as a site for nuclear energy until the
end of 2025. Despite the stop to the plans for a Chinese-led nuclear power
station in Bradwell, campaigners are continuing to take a stand against the
site being considered for nuclear use.

 Maldon Standard 6th April 2023

https://www.maldonandburnhamstandard.co.uk/news/23434138.bradwell-b-power-station-campaigners-nuclear/

April 8, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Opponents pack Pilgrim Nuclear meeting as potential discharge of radioactive water looms

CAI | By Jennette Barnes, March 28, 2023

Opponents of the proposed discharge of radioactive water from the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station packed a meeting on the future of the station last night.

Ryan Collins of Bourne received a standing ovation from the audience when he presented a thick binder of signatures from his Change.org petition. The petition calls for a stop to the discharge plan. It garnered more than 200,000 signatures.

The state’s Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel hosted the meeting at Plymouth Town Hall as part of its regular calendar.

…………………………………… opponents argue that the terms of a state settlement with Holtec would make a release of contaminated water illegal, with or without a permit.

Many members of the audience held orange signs that read, “Protect our bays! No permit!” in reference to the proposed modification of Holtec’s permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.

Jo-Anne Wilson-Keenan, of East Dennis, said she’s concerned about contamination. Speaking from the podium, she raised her arm to show the shape of Cape Cod and the location of Dennis.

“We live right here in the elbow, and when the radioactive water comes down from Plymouth, it’s going to land right on our beaches,” she said.

Jim Cantwell, state director for U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, discussed Markey’s March 17 letter to Holtec asking the company to use the ratepayer-funded decommissioning trust fund to pay for an independent scientific study of the risks of discharging the radioactive water stored at Pilgrim.

Last May, at a field hearing hosted by Markey in Plymouth, Singh agreed to allow independent testing.

Meanwhile, state-supervised testing of the Pilgrim water is set to begin with a collection of samples on April 5. Senior staff from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Public Health are scheduled to observe, along with a representative of the town of Plymouth.

But Seth Pickering, a deputy regional director with DEP, said the state no longer plans to use the previously identified Colorado lab, Eurofins, to test for non-radioactive pollutants.

The agency will instead rely on Gel Laboratories of South Carolina, which Pickering disclosed is a lab Holtec uses as well.

Members of the audience objected to the idea of using the same lab as Holtec…………….  https://www.capeandislands.org/local-news/2023-03-28/opponents-pack-pilgrim-nuclear-meeting-as-potential-discharge-of-radioactive-water-looms

April 3, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, USA, water | Leave a comment

Canadian First Nations do not want small nuclear reactors on their lands


Decolonizing energy and the nuclear narrative of small modular reactors   https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/february-2022/decolonizing-energy-and-the-nuclear-narrative-of-small-modular-reactors/
Kebaowek First Nation is calling for an alternative to a planned SMR project, one that won’t undermine proper consultation and leave a toxic legacy.

by Lance Haymond, Tasha Carruthers, Kerrie Blaise, February 7, 2022  In early 2021, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission began reviewing the application from a company called Global First Power to build a nuclear reactor at the Chalk River Laboratories site about 200 kilometres northwest of Ottawa.

This project, known as a micro modular reactor project, is an example of the nuclear industry’s latest offering – a small modular reactor (SMR).SMRs are based on the same fundamental physical processes as regular (large) nuclear reactors; they just produce less electricity per plant. They also produce the same dangerous byproducts: plutonium and radioactive fission products (materials that are created by the splitting of uranium nuclei). These are all dangerous to human health and have to be kept away from contact with people and communities for hundreds of thousands of years. No country has so far demonstrated a safe way to deal with these.

Despite these unsolved challenges, the nuclear industry promotes SMRs and nuclear energy as a carbon-free alternative to diesel for powering remote northern communities. The Canadian government has exempted small modular reactors from full federal environmental assessment under the Impact Assessment Act. Many civil society groups have condemned this decision because it allows SMRs to escape the public scrutiny of environmental, health and social impacts.

The proposed new SMR in Chalk River, like the existing facilities, would be located on Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation territory and the lands of Kebaowek First Nation – a First Nation that has never been consulted about the use of its unceded territory and that has been severely affected by past nuclear accidents at the site.

At this critical juncture of climate action and Indigenous reconciliation, Kebaowek First Nation is calling for the SMR project at Chalk River to be cancelled and the focus shifted to solutions that do not undermine the ability of First Nations communities to be properly consulted and that do not leave behind a toxic legacy.

While these reactors are dubbed “small,” it would be a mistake to assume their environmental impact is also “small.” The very first serious nuclear accident in the world involved a small reactor: In 1952, uranium fuel rods in the NRX reactor at Chalk River melted down and the accident led to the release of radioactive materials into the atmosphere and the soil. In 1958, the same reactor suffered another accident when a uranium rod caught fire; some workers exposed to radiation continue to battle for compensation.

What makes these accidents worse – and calls into question the justification for new nuclear development at Chalk River – is that this colonized land is the territory of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation territory (which consists of 11 First Nations whose territory stretches along the entire Ottawa River watershed straddling Quebec and Ontario). Kebaowek First Nation, part of the Algonquin Nation, was among those First Nations never consulted about the original nuclear facilities on their unceded territory, and is still struggling to be heard by the federal government and nuclear regulator. Its land has never been relinquished through treaty; its leaders and people were never consulted when Chalk River was chosen as the site for Canada’s first nuclear reactors; and no thought was given to how the nuclear complex might affect the Kitchi Sibi (the Ottawa River).

History is being repeated at Chalk River today as the government pushes ahead with the micro modular reactor project without consent from Kebaowek. Assessments of the project have been scoped so narrowly that they neglect the historical development and continued existence of nuclear facilities on Kebaowek’s traditional territory. The justification for an SMR at this location without full and thorough consideration of historically hosted nuclear plants – for which there was no consultation nor accommodation – is a tenuous starting point and one that threatens the protection of Indigenous rights.

The narrative of nuclear energy in Canada is one of selective storytelling and one that hides the reality of the Indigenous communities that remain deeply affected, first by land being taken away for nuclear reactor construction, and later by the radioactive pollution at the site. All too fitting is the term radioactive colonialism coined by scholars Ward Churchill and Winona LaDuke, to describe the disproportionate impact on Indigenous people and their land as a result of uranium mining and other nuclear developments. In country after country, the uranium that fuels nuclear plants has predominantly been mined from the traditional lands of Indigenous Peoples at the expense of the health of Indigenous Peoples and their self-determination.

Kebaowek First Nation has been vocal in its objection to the continuation of the nuclear industry on its lands without its free prior and informed consent, as is its right under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Despite requests for the suspension of the SMR project, pending adequate provisions for Indigenous co-operation and the Crown’s legal duty to initiate meaningful consultation, Kebaowek has yet to see its efforts reflected in government decisions and Crown-led processes.

Nuclear is a colonial energy form, but it is also bio-ignorant capitalism – a term coined by scholars Renata Avila and Andrés Arauz to describe the ways in which the current economic order ignores the planetary climate emergency, human and ecological tragedies, and the large-scale impact on nature. The narrative of nuclear as a “clean energy source” is a prime example of this bio-ignorance. Decision-makers have become fixated on carbon emissions as a metric for “clean and green,” ignoring the radioactive impacts and the risks of accidents with the technology.

It is more than 70 years since Chalk River became the site for the splitting of the nucleus. The continuation of nuclear energy production on unceded Indigenous territory without meaningful dialogue is a telling example of continued colonial practices, wherein companies extract value from Indigenous land while polluting it; offer little to no compensation to impacted communities; and abide by timelines driven by the project’s proponents, not the community affected. We need to move away from this colonial model of decision-making and decolonize our energy systems.

The challenge of climate change is urgent, but responses to the crisis must not perpetuate extractivist solutions, typical of colonial thinking, wherein the long-term impacts – from the production of toxic waste to radioactive releases – lead to highly unequal impacts.

The authors thank Justin Roy, councilor and economic development officer at Kebaowek First Nation, and M.V. Ramana, professor at the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia, for contributing to this article.

April 2, 2023 Posted by | Canada, indigenous issues, opposition to nuclear, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Over 100 Canadian organisations oppose funding for small modular nuclear reactors in federal budget .

Ottawa, Monday, March 27, 2023 – Environmental and civil society groups are giving a thumbs-down after the federal government announced new funding on Friday towards the development of small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs). The groups  will be looking closely at the numbers in Tuesday’s budget.

The “Prime Minister Trudeau and President Biden Joint Statement,“ issued on Friday March 24, committed Canada to provide funding and in-kind support for a US-led program to promote SMRs.

The Canadian government’s Strategic Innovation Fund has already given close to $100 million to corporations working on experimental SMR technologies.  In addition, the Canada Infrastructure Bank has committed $970 million to Ontario Power Generation’s plan for a 300-megawatt SMR at Darlington. Federal funding is benefiting US-based companies GE-Hitachi and Westinghouse, and Canada’s SNC-Lavalin, among others.

All the funded SMR projects are still in the research and development phase. Worldwide, no SMRs have ever been built for domestic use. 

In addition, the federal government is giving Atomic Energy of Canada Limited $1.35 billion a year to conduct nuclear research and development and to manage its toxic radioactive waste.  Nearly all this funding is transferred to a consortium of SNC-Lavalin and two US-based companies (Fluor and Jacobs) that that are heavily involved in nuclear weapons and SMR research.

Over 100 groups from all across Canada have criticized the federal government’s plan to promote SMR nuclear technology, stating that:

  • SMRs are a dirty, dangerous distraction that will produce radioactive waste of many kinds. Especially worrisome are those proposed reactors that would extract plutonium from irradiated fuel, raising the spectre of nuclear weapons proliferation.
  • SMRs will take too long to develop to address the urgent climate crisis in the short time frame necessary to achieve Canada’s goals.
  • SMRs will be much more expensive than renewable energy and energy efficiency. Small reactors will be even more expensive per unit of power than the current large ones, which have priced themselves out of the market.
  • Nuclear power creates fewer jobs than renewable energy and efficiency. Solar, wind and tidal power are among the fastest-growing job sectors in North America.  The International Energy Agency forecasts that 90% of new electrical capacity installed worldwide over the next five years will be renewable.

The federal government needs to invest urgently in renewables, energy conservation and climate action, not slow, expensive, speculative nuclear technologies.

QUOTES:

“Taxpayer dollars should not be wasted on a future technology whose time is past, like nuclear reactors, when truly clean renewable solutions are up-and-running and getting more affordable all the time.”  – Dr. Gordon Edwards, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility

“Let’s compete to be world leaders in renewables.  Pouring public funding into speculative reactor technologies is sabotaging our efforts to address the climate crisis.” – Dr. Ole Hendrickson, Sierra Club Canada Foundation

The SMR technologies are all at the early R&D stage, yet the funding is not following good governance practices by requiring high standards of peer review.“ –  Dr. Susan O’Donnell, Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick

March 28, 2023 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear | 1 Comment

Second U.S. Citizen Headed to German Prison for Anti-Nuclear Weapons Actions

BY JOHN LAFORGE. 23 Mar 23, https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/03/23/second-u-s-citizen-headed-to-german-prison-for-anti-nuclear-weapons-actions/

While dread of nuclear war between Russia and NATO states over Ukraine have reached new heights, especially in Europe, a second U.S. citizen has been ordered to serve prison time in Germany for protest actions demanding that U.S. nuclear bombs stationed at Germany’s Büchel NATO base, southeast of Cologne, be withdrawn.

Dennis DuVall, 81, member of Veterans for Peace, U.S. Air Force veteran of the war in Vietnam, and veteran anti-nuclear activist, is to report to the federal prison in Bautzen, Germany, 32 miles east of Dresden (JVA Bautzen, Breitscheid Str. 4, 02625 Bautzen, Germany), on Thursday March 23 to begin a 60-day sentence.

On July 15, 2018, DuVall was one of 18 people who clipped through the chain link fence and enter the base in order to — as the group said in a statement — “bring an end to the ongoing criminal conspiracy to unleash uncontrollable and indiscriminate heat, blast, and radiation with every B61 nuclear bomb deployed at Büchel NATO base.”

Charged with trespass and damage to property, DuVall explained to German trial and appeals courts that he has a legal obligation under the Nuremberg Principles to join in nonviolent protests to prevent or halt the planning and preparation for nuclear attacks which is taking place at Büchel. Well-reported exercises like the annual “Steadfast Noon” are often described as nuclear attack rehearsals.

Today, with NATO materially at war in Ukraine, the needless forward-basing of U.S. H-bombs at six European NATO base’s facing Russia has never been more provocative or destabilizing. NATO’s latest “Strategic Concept” (June 2022) reaffirmed its ever-present threat to launch nuclear first-use attacks using U.S., French and British weapons.

In Cochem District Court on May 11, 2020, DuVall was the first U.S. citizen to be convicted in Germany for civil resistance against the ongoing threat to attack Russia with the U.S. nuclear weapons stationed at Büchel, 170-kiloton B61-3, and 50-kiloton B61-4 free-fall hydrogen bombs.

For years, Büchel protest defendants have warned of the base’s threat of nuclear annihilation, and have urged court authorities “to send a message to the German government to remove B61 H-bombs from Büchel NATO base, and return them to the United States for dismantling and disposal.” In trial testimony on May 11, 2020, DuVall reminded the District Court Judge that “the threat of nuclear weapons is a clear and present danger to the European community, and nuclear war is an existential threat to the web of life on our planet.”

In refusing to pay a court-imposed fine, DuVall explained to the public prosecutor in the case that “it is a matter of conscience I share with many other U.S., Dutch, and German Büchel defendants not to pay money to those who willingly protect weapons of mass murder deployed at Büchel NATO base.”

The first U.S. citizen to be jailed in similar protests, yours truly (writer John LaForge), was released February 28 from Glasmoor prison near Hamburg after serving 50 days.

“It is my right and my duty,” says DuVall, “to work toward the abolition of nuclear weapons, and it is the responsibility of the German government to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and to ensure the prompt removal of U.S. B61 thermonuclear weapons from Büchel NATO base.”

John LaForge is a Co-director of Nukewatch, a peace and environmental justice group in Wisconsin, and edits its newsletter.

March 26, 2023 Posted by | Legal, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament condemns UK decision to send depleted uranium shells to Ukraine

The UK government is sending depleted uranium shells for use in the Challenger 2 tanks gifted to Ukraine, a move CND has condemned as an additional environmental and health disaster for those living through the conflict. 

First reported by Declassified UK, Defence Minister Baroness Goldie admitted in the answer to a written question that armour piercing rounds containing depleted uranium (DU) were included in its tank package for Kiev. She added that the rounds “are highly effective in defeating modern tanks and armoured vehicles.”

A byproduct of the nuclear enriching process used to make nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons, DU emits three quarters of the radioactivity of natural uranium and shares many of its risks and dangers. It is used in armour piercing rounds as it is heavy and can easily penetrate steel. However on impact, toxic or radioactive dust can be released and subsequently inhaled. 

READ MORE: CND’s briefing paper on depleted uranium

DU shells were used extensively by the US and British in Iraq in 1991 and 2003, as well as in the Balkans during the 1990s.

It is thought that the extensive use of these shells is responsible for the sharp rise in the incidence rate of some cancers like breast cancer or lymphoma in the areas they were used. Other illnesses linked to DU include kidney failure, nervous system disorders, lung disease and reproductive problems. However, a lack of reliable data on exposure to DU means no large-scale study on its true impact exists. 

CND General Secretary Kate Hudson said: 

“Like in Iraq, the addition of depleted uranium ammunition into this conflict will only increase the long-term suffering of the civilians caught up in this conflict. DU shells have already been implicated in thousands of unnecessary deaths from cancer and other serious illnesses. CND has repeatedly called for the UK government to place an immediate moratorium on the use of depleted uranium weapons and to fund long-term studies into their health and environmental impacts. Sending them into yet another war zone will not help the people of Ukraine.”

March 24, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Bi -Partisan measure opposes Canadian plan to store nuclear waste long term near Lake Huron

Melissa Nann Burke, The Detroit News

Washington ― A bipartisan group of Great Lakes lawmakers introduced a resolution in Congress on Wednesday to oppose a Canadian proposal to permanently store spent nuclear fuel waste in the Great Lakes Basin.

The move comes ahead of President Joe Biden’s first trip to Canada as president this week to meet with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The resolution is concerned with Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization, which plans to decide next year on one of two potential sites for a nuclear waste facility, either Ignace, Ontario, or South Bruce, which is in the Great Lakes basin and less than 40 miles from Lake Huron.

The resolution says that Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken should ensure that the government of Canada does not permanently store nuclear waste in the Great Lakes Basin.

It goes on to warn that a “spill” of such waste into the lakes during transit to a deep geological repository “could have lasting and severely adverse environmental, health and economic impacts on the Great Lakes and the individuals who depend on the Great Lakes for their livelihoods.”

The measure is led by U.S. Reps. Dan Kildee, D-Flint Township, and John James, R-Farmington Hills, in the House and U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Lansing, in the Senate.

“Storing hazardous nuclear waste in our shared waterways threatens the drinking water of millions of people in the United States and Canada, and jeopardizes jobs in the fishing, boating and tourism industries,” Kildee said in a statement. “I urge President Biden to address Canada’s plan to permanently bury nuclear waste in the Great Lakes basin as he meets with Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau.”

The resolution has 15 other House co-sponsors including Michigan Reps. Jack Bergman of Watersmeet, John Moolenaar of Caledonia, Bill Huizenga of Holland, Lisa McClain of Bruce Township, Debbie Dingell of Ann Arbor, Elissa Slotkin of Lansing, Hillary Scholten of Grand Rapids, Haley Stevens of Birmingham and Shri Thanedar of Detroit as well as five Senate co-sponsors, including Sen. Gary Peters of Bloomfield Township……………………………………………………………………………….  https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/michigan/2023/03/22/measure-opposes-canadian-plan-to-store-nuclear-waste-near-lake-huron/70036108007/

March 23, 2023 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Fukushima nuclear water plan is a new blow to fishermen

Locals believe livelihoods are at risk as authorities attempt to tackle
contamination 12 years on from the disaster. The authorities are about to
begin pumping contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant
into the Pacific Ocean.

More than a million tons of water will be released
into the sea over the next thirty years. The waste water will be treated
and diluted to remove most radioactive contaminants, but will still contain
traces of the isotopes, tritium and carbon-14.

The governments of China,
South Korea and Pacific island nations have protested against the decision.
But none are affected more directly than the fishermen of Fukushima. Twelve
years after the catastrophe, there is no clear timeline for the
decommissioning of Fukushima Daiichi, which is decades away from being
safely dismantled.

In the meantime, 130 tons of water is contaminated by it
every day. Some of this is poured directly onto the broken reactors to cool
them. Much is natural ground water which flows through the earth towards
the sea, picking up radiation from the exposed reactors on the way.

To prevent the groundwater reaching the plant in the first place, the
authorities built an underground “ice wall” of frozen earth, but this
has been only partly effective. Filtering is supposed to remove all the
radioactive elements except for tritium, which is routinely released into
the sea in diluted form from nuclear plants around the world

. But carbon-14
and trace elements of more dangerous radioactive substances, including
strontium-90 and iodine-129, have also been detected in the water. The
Japanese government says that tritium will be diluted to less than one-40th
of the concentration permitted under Japanese safety standards and
one-seventh of the World Health Organisation’s permitted level for safe
drinking water.

According to Tepco, the radiation in the tritium in the
water amounts to some 860 trillion becquerels — less than half the 1,620
trillion becquerels released from Britain’s Sellafield plant in 2015. The
theory is that the water will quickly and harmlessly dissipate into the
vastness of the Pacific Ocean.

But environmentalists and some scientists
disagree. The US National Association of Marine Laboratories claims that
the statistics, assumptions and models used in the Tepco projections are
flawed. It points to the danger of concentrated clusters of radiation
accumulating on the ocean floor.

Shaun Burnie, a nuclear expert at
Greenpeace, says that the water should be stored longer in tanks, allowing
time for the tritium to reduce, and that the decision to release into the
ocean is as much as about saving money as science. It also gives an
illusion of concrete progress.

Even if it is safe, it makes little
difference to the fishermen of Soma, for whom even just the perception of a
danger is enough to harm their business. Among them opinion is divided.
Some oppose the release under any circumstances; others, including Konno,
reluctantly accept it as the least worst option given that only complete
decommissioning, decades in the future, will solve the problem.

Times 10th March 2023

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fukishima-japan-water-nuclear-plant-disaster-pacific-ocean-2023-pz80hcfl6

March 12, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

In Taiwan, strong opposition to extending life of nuclear reactor

Proposed 20-year nuclear plant extension opposed

NO WASTE STORAGE: Renewable energy last year contributed more than the output of nuclear sources, but the nation risks moving backward, critics said

By Chen Chia-yi and Kayleigh Madjar / Staff reporter, with staff writer 10 Mar 23  https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2023/03/10/2003795851

The National Nuclear Abolition Action Platform yesterday criticized calls by politicians to extend the service of the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant’s No. 2 reactor, saying it disregards public sentiment and does not address problems with waste storage.

Some lawmakers have suggested a 20-year extension of the No. 2 reactor at the plant in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里), which is set to reach the end of its lifespan on Tuesday, the groups told a news conference in Taipei.

More than 12 years after the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster in Japan, issues with contamination and wastewater have yet to be resolved, Green Citizens’ Action Alliance secretary-general Tsuei Su-hsin (崔愫欣) said.

The disaster occurred just as the plant turned 40 years old, said Tsai Ya-ying (蔡雅瀅), an attorney with the Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association.

Although the main cause was a tsunami triggered by an earthquake, an underlying weakness that exacerbated the disaster was the age of its facilities, Tsai said.

The second reactor at the Guosheng plant is about to turn 40 next week and should be decommissioned, she said.

Without locations identified to store nuclear waste, there is no basis for discussing continued use of the reactor, Environmental Jurists Association researcher Hsieh Pei-yi (謝蓓宜) said.

Politicians and corporate leaders — including Taipei City Councilor Wang Hung-wei (王鴻薇) and Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) — have been using “false, one-sided information” to call for its extension, Citizen of the Earth, Taiwan executive director Tsai Chung-yueh (蔡中岳) said.

They have not addressed the issue of waste storage sites at the plant being filled to capacity, he said, adding that they have evading the question whenever asked.

They are not only disregarding public concern about nuclear waste, but also ignoring legal provisions that require extension requests to be made at least five years before a nuclear plant’s decommission date, Tsai said.

Japan’s experience with restarting its nuclear plants was much different than perceived, the groups said.


In 2011, Japan had 54 nuclear generating units, 24 of which had been decommissioned, they said.

In the years since, seven have been restarted, and more planned restarts were canceled due to public opposition, the groups said.

Last year, renewables contributed close to that of nuclear in the nation’s power mix, at 8.3 percent, the groups said, adding that Taiwan should not to “move backward” on energy transition.

Renewable energy should be made a more viable long-term goal, Homemakers United Foundation director Wu Hsin-ping (吳心萍) said.

Solar and small-scale hydropower are being used in many communities, Wu said.

For example, one small 20-kilowatt solar installation in Taipei, despite frequent overcast weather in the capital, is able to produce a month of power in a year for about 70 households, she said.

March 12, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, Taiwan | Leave a comment

Canadian environmental watchdog group ROEE does not support expansion of nuclear power

Le Regroupement des organismes environnementaux en énergie (ROEE) is a voluntary association of Quebec groups with a fine professional team:

ROEE is funded to intervene in hearings of the Régie de l’Énergie on matters related to energy and the environment and toeducate the public on such matters in a regular way. The ROEE was founded in 1997 following a public debate on energy policy in Quebec that led to the creation of the

Régie de l’Énergie
on matters related to energy and the environment and to educate the public on such matters in a regular way.

The ROEE was founded in 1997 following a public debate on energy policy in Quebec that led to the creation of the Régie.

The Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, known in
Quebec as le Regroupement pour la surveillance du nucléaire,
is one of the founding members of the ROEE.

The ROEE is a champion of “soft energy paths” based on energy
efficiency and renewable energy sources, and has recently decided
to adopt a policy on nuclear power although Quebec phased out of
nuclear power in 2012 with the closure of the only operating nuclear
power reactor in Quebec called “Gentilly-2”. (Gentilly-1 was retired
many years beforehand).  

Quebec also adopted a one-year moratorium
on uranium mining in 2014, leading to a year-long series of hearing in
Quebec conducted by the BAPE (Bueau des audiences publiques
sur l’environnement), who recommended in 2015 that the moratorium
on uranium exploration and mining be made permanent. So far this
has not been done but uranium exploration has been terminated in the
province of Quebec – hence we have an informal moratorium in effect.

Membres du ROEE (2023)

Association madelinienne pour la sécurité énergétique et environnementale
Canot Kayak Québec
Écohabitation
Fondation Coule pas chez nous
Fondation Rivières
Nature Québec
Draft Policy on  nuclear power
(English original and French translation are copied below).

ROEE does not support the expansion of nuclear power based on the fissioning of uranium or plutonium as an energy source. The unsolved problems associated with nuclear fission technology are far more significant than any benefits it is supposed to offer, and there are now more affordable alternatives such as energy efficiency and renewable energy sources that are easier and faster to deploy than nuclear.

Background

•Nuclear fission inevitably creates a long-lived legacy of human-made radioactive wastes that will continue to challenge the health and safety of humans and the environment for hundreds of thousands of years. By far the most intensely radioactive wastes are contained in the used nuclear fuel. These wastes cannot be eliminated or neutralized but only contained, and safe containment over such long time periods cannot be assured.

•Materials such as stainless steel and concrete in the core area of a nuclear reactor also become long-lived radioactive wastes and therefore cannot be recycled. This debris cannot be decontaminated, it must be kept out of the environment for many generations after dismantling the reactors, which is delayed for decades to protect workers from excessive exposure. Canada has no strategy for dealing with these wastes over the very long term.

The risk of catastrophic nuclear accidents cannot be eliminated. Even if the risk is small, the consequences can be unacceptable, leading to radioactive contamination of large land areas and large volumes of water, as well as the permanent evacuation of large populations.

• The risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons using plutonium created in nuclear reactors, as India did in 1974, is not negligible. Such proliferation remains a significant danger for thousands of years after the last reactor is shut down.

• The proliferation risk becomes more acute when “advanced” nuclear reactors require the extraction of plutonium from used nuclear fuel to create more nuclear fuel – an operation called “reprocessing”. Reprocessing is now being considered by the Canadian government in coinnection with new reactors proposed for New Brunswick.

• ROEE supports the movement to ban reprocesssing – plutonium extraction –  in Canada. Non-proliferation experts are agreed that ready access to plutonium should not be encouraged. In 1977, US President Carter banned reprocessing in the USA because of the proliferation risk.

• ROEE opposes uranium mining as well. The only significant uses of uranium are as an explosive for nuclear weapons and as a fuel for nuclear reactors. ROEE is opposed to both.


• Uranium mining also leaves a long-lived radioactive waste legacy. Canada currently has over 120 million tonnes of radioactive waste left over from uranium mining. These wastes will rmain danberous for hundreds of thousands of years.

• Uranium wastes, called “tailings”, contain some of the deadliest naturally occurring toxic materials known to science, such as radium, polonium, and radon gas. Mining brings these materials to the surface and makes them much more accessible to the environment.
 

ROEE Positions

 ROEE disagrees wth the promotion of a new generation of nuclear reactors to deal with the climate emergency. Compared with energy efficiency and renewables such as solar and wind, nuclear power is at least 4 to 7 times more costly and much too slow to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a timely fashion. In contrast to the proven performance and declining price of alternatives, new nuclear reactors are uncertain in performance and sometimes are completely unusable, while experience has shown a pattern of major price escalations and construction delays for nuclear projects.

ROEE applauds the decision to close down the Gentilly-2 reactor at Bécancour in 2012, thereby phasing out nuclear power in Québec. ROEE urges government to make this phase-out permanent by banning the construction of any new nuclear power reactors in the province.

A severe nuclear accident in either Ontario or New Brunswick can have serious airborne and water-borne consequences in Quebec as well as in those provinces.  ROEE urges the government to encourage the phaseout of nuclear power in neighbouring provinces for safety reasons, while continuing to offer them sales of excess hydroelectric power from Quebec.

ROEE welcomes the 2015 recommendation of the BAPE for the government to declare a permanent moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec. ROEE urges the government to accept this recommendation fully by passing a law that bans uranium exploration and mining in the province, similar to the law passed by Nova Scotia on the same matter.

ROEE supports Quebec’s determination not to accept the import of long-lived radioactive waste from other jurisdictions for permanent storage in Quebec.

In addition, ROEE opposes current federal plans to construct a permanent radioactive storage facility on the surface at Chalk River, just one kilomete from the Ottawa River, close to the Quebec border. This landfill operation is intended to house one million cubic metres of radioactive wastes and other toxic materials such as asbestos and lead, some of it imported from as far away as Manitoba. As of 2022, over 130 municipalities, including the members of the Montreal Agglomeration Council, have opposed the planned Chalk River dump. ROEE supports their efforts to prevent  it also urges the government of Quebec to do likewise.

March 7, 2023 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »