Taiwanese Group walks for 30 hours to protest nuclear power
SYMBOLIC MARCH: The demonstrators represented the number of boroughs that would be evacuated if there were a disaster at the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant
- By Yang Mian-chieh / Staff reporter, with CNA A group of 21 people demonstrating against nuclear power completed their march in Taipei yesterday after beginning it in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District (貢寮) the day before.
They were joined by supporters as they reached their destination on Ketagalan Boulevard in front of the Presidential Office Building after nearly 30 hours of walking.
Organized by the National Nuclear Abolition Action Platform, the event was aimed at encouraging people to vote “no” in a referendum on Dec. 18 that asks whether the government should restart construction on the mothballed Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District.
The 21 demonstrators represented the 21 boroughs within an 8km radius of the power plant that would be required to evacuate in the event of a nuclear disaster: 11 boroughs in Gongliao District, eight in New Taipei City’s Shuangsi District (雙溪) and two in Yilan County’s Toucheng Township (頭城), the National Nuclear Abolition Action Platform said.
Separately yesterday, a group rallied in front of the Legislative Yuan in Taipei, urging people to vote “yes” for the referendum question on whether a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal project should be relocated to protect algal reefs off Taoyuan’s Guanyin District (觀音).
They called for the government to review the nation’s energy policy rather than resort to “emotionally blackmailing the public with fears of a power shortage.”
Environmentalists have said that the algal reef took at least 5,000 years to form and is the largest of its kind in the world.
It also has rich biodiversity, and is home to the endangered coral species Polycyathus chaishanensis and hammerhead sharks that are listed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species, they said…….
…….. The Democratic Progressive Party has launched a promotional campaign urging people to vote “no” on all four items,…. https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2021/12/06/2003769106
Protest against plan for nuclear waste dump in West Cumbria, close to National Park
NEW NUCLEAR DUMP FOR HIGHER ACTIVITY WASTES AT DRIGG LOW LEVEL WASTE REPOSITORY? NIREX REBRANDED? From Lakes Against Nuclear Dump to the Lake District National Park Authority. 28 Nov 21, A letter of alarm regarding plans for an Intermediate Level Nuclear Waste Dump for the UK’s Low Level Waste Repository at the village of Drigg. The UKs LLWR is 250 metres from the National Park Boundary at the nearest point. The following letter has been sent to local and national media and mainstream NGOs have been alerted.
Dear Member of the Lake District National Park Authority,
Congratulations on the 70th anniversary of the Lake District National Park. In the original Lake Counties is another 70th anniversary. The Windscale Piles. Which from 1951 produced plutonium for Britain to make its own atomic and hydrogen bombs until the Windscale Fire of 1957. Unfortunately lessons were not learnt. The nuclear experiment continues despite no final solution to the problem of what to do with the escalating wastes from 70 years of military and civil nuclear reactors. Our own view as a nuclear safety group is that the wastes should not be buried out of sight and out of mind but should be closely monitored and repackaged when necessary.
NIREX REBORN AT DRIGG? – Intermediate Level Nuclear Wastes for Burial approximately 250 metres from the National Park?
We have been alerted by locals in the Drigg area to a plan which is running in tandem with that for a deep Geological Disposal Facility which Government say: “will be available to receive the first waste in the 2040s” However the plan for Near Surface Disposal (10s of metres below ground) “could be available within the next 10 years.” This plan, for which the Low Level Radioactive Waste Repository at Drigg is under active consideration, is for the disposal/dumping of Intermediate Level Wastes of the type that were rejected by the NIREX inquiry for deep GDF disposal at Longlands Farm, Gosforth in 1997. Exploratory boreholes have already been drilled at Drigg for the Near Surface Disposal of Intermediate Level Nuclear Wastes, presumably under “permitted development.”
Just like the early days of the Windscale Piles this plan has been put in motion under the radar of public attention. There has not been any debate or vote at Local, Borough or County Council level nor, we assume, any discussion by the Lake District National Park despite the Low Level Waste Repository being only 250 metres from the Lake District National Park boundary. Intermediate Level Nuclear Wastes, according to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, “exceeds the upper boundaries for Low Level Waste but does not generate a significant amount of heat. ..The major components of ILW are nuclear reactor components, graphite from reactor cores and sludges from the treatment of radioactive liquid effluents.”
The NIREX dump entrance proposal for Intermediate Level Wastes was rejected in the 1990s because the nuclear industry had no idea how much and how fast the planned dump would leak. They still have no idea. Furthermore for a shallow dump the leaks would be even faster…………
The fundamental conclusion of the expert Assessor and myself was that the Proposed Repository Zone had been chosen for these studies in an arbitrary manner, without conforming to internationally agreed, geological criteria
Earlier in a letter to “The Guardian” of June 28,’07 the NIREX Inquiry Inspector had stated : “The relevant geology in west Cumbria is apparently now claimed to be ‘stable, although imperfect’.…the imperfection consists of simply failing to meet the internationally agreed criteria on the suitability of rocks for nuclear waste deposit. The site should be in a region of low groundwater flow, and the geology should be readily characterisable and predictable, whereas the rocks there are actually of a complex volcanic nature, with significant faulting. Also, the industry was relying on an overlying layer of sedimentary strata to dilute and disperse any groundwater leakage, when the international criteria require such a layer to act instead as a barrier…The site is not suitable and investigations should be moved elsewhere…”.
And: “The site selection process was flawed, not treating safety as the most important factor, and irrationally affected by a strong desire to locate close to Sellafield.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jun/28/nuclear.uk
The latest process to deliver a GDF (with Cumbria STILL in the frame), Radioactive Waste Management, is now in partnership with the LLWR at Drigg. These bodies along with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority are all advised by the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management which is in turn taking “invaluable” advice on construction and delivery of deep (GDF) and not so deep (NSD) dumping/disposal from West Cumbria Mining’s CEO Mark Kirkbride. Kirkbride compiled CoRWMs Annual Report No 3724 which details the push for Near Surface Disposal: “advice in the last year have been in relation to the concept of Near Surface Disposal (NSD) for intermediate level waste which is being explored by NDA as a potential solution for the disposal of specific intermediate level waste materials, reducing the volume of certain elements of the inventory into a GDF.
The Lake District National Park Authority surely cannot ignore this. If Intermediate and heat generating High Level nuclear waste is brushed under the Lake District fringes and abandoned, then the World’s Nuclear Heritage Site will soon become the World’s Nuclear Sacrifice Zone. This could happen within a decade for the Intermediate Level Wastes at Drigg. Please protect the Lake District and its fringes, tomorrow is too late to say “This Far and No Further.”
yours sincerely
Marianne Birkby
Lakes Against Nuclear Dump – a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign
https://www.lakesagainstnucleardump.com/ https://www.lakesagainstnucleardump.com/post/new-nuclear-dump-for-higher-activity-wastes-at-drigg-low-level-waste-repository-nirex-rebranded
The “brigands” regroup in Basilicata

Italians reunite in the face of a renewed radioactive waste dump threat
The “brigands” regroup in Basilicata — Beyond Nuclear International 28 Nov 21,
”………………………………………… between November 13 and 27, 2003, just weeks before we arrived. An unprecedented and dramatic 15 days of protest had unfolded in Scanzano Jonico, culminating in the defeat of a plan by the Italian government, then led by Silvio Berlusconi, to dump all of Italy’s high-level radioactive waste at a single site at Terza Cavone, a few kilometers from Scanzano, in salt rock at a site just 200 meters from the shoreline.
The dump decision had been taken at night, without local consultation, the news deliberately buried in the papers, eclipsed by a headline-garnering suicide bombing that had killed 18 Italian service members at the Nasiriyah Carabinieri barracks in Iraq during that ill-waged war.
But the Lucani noticed the announcement right away. The news struck “like a lightning bolt” Tonino Colucci of the local World Wildlife Fund chapter told me later as we walked into that surprise press conference.
Before the ink was even dry, they had set up a base camp at Terza Cavone — where we were now. They had rallied people from all walks of life to protest, occupy stations, and block highways. The whole region declared itself a nuclear-free zone. Berlusconi’s own members of parliament in the area opposed the deal. By November 23, the ranks of protesters had swelled to 100,000. After fifteen days, the radioactive waste dump was canceled.
The protest garnered widespread coverage, including in the New York Times, and even spawned academic papers, one such describing the remarkable victory as having “cut across lines of locality, age, social class and political affiliation, mobilizing the populace with various symbols, including references to brigandage, postwar struggles for land, and the Madonna of Loreto.” I wrote up my own experiences in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
Along with the expected objections — the unsuitability of the site so close to the sea; the damage to agriculture and the tourism trade —outrage was also expressed at the desecration of an area so steeped in ancient history. Pythagoras had fled to Basilicata from Greece. He made his table here. He died at Metaponto, just 16 kilometers from the proposed radioactive waste dump site. It was unthinkable to build a nuclear waste dump in such a venerable place!
So here we were at Terza Cavone having a press conference even though the victory had already been won. The site remained occupied. Passions still ran high (encapsulated later as they broke into brigand songs around what was now a roaring camp fire). There was plenty to talk about; plenty still to learn. But I learned more that night from listening — to farmers will the precious dirt of Basilicata still beneath their finger-nails; from union representatives; from mothers and vintners — than talking.
And that vigilance persists today as, once again, the Italian government has fingered Basilicata as a place “ideally suited” to a high-level radioactive waste dump. The protesters haven’t gone away, remaining on guard against just such a day when they might once again be targeted.
Only this time, Basilicata is not alone.
The news first broke in January 2021, that Sogin — the Italian state-owned company responsible for reactor decommissioning and radioactive waste management —had released a map identifying 67 potential sites in five zones that it considered suitable for a high-level radioactive waste repository. The selected sites included 17 in Basilicata and neighboring Puglia. Fifty more, in Piedmont, Tuscany-Lazio, Sardinia and Sicily, comprised the rest.
Italy’s high-level radioactive wastes are the product of just four now closed commercial reactors, one of which was already shut down when a 1987 national referendum, just a year after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, recorded a stunning vote of more than 80% of Italians opposed to the continued use of nuclear power. (With bafflingly daft timing, a 2011 Berlusconi government ran the referendum again three months after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March. This time, 93% of Italians said they opposed a nuclear re-start.)
Italy’s radioactive waste is currently stored in about 20 temporary sites, none of which have been deemed suitable as final repositories. Reports on the inspections of the 67 sites identified by Sogin are due in December. A new shortlist of sites is expected in January 2022.
The Lucani, still organized under the mantel they established in 2003, Scanziamo le Scorie — which loosely translates as ‘we reject the wastes’ — are hoping to reignite the same momentum that brought them victory the first time. They participated in the National Seminar carried out by Sogin between September 7 and November 24 this year, and have prepared their own comments (in Italian) on the so-called criteria for suitable sites.
So far, the Sogin proposal has been met with vehement rejection. A spokesperson from Sardinia called it “an act of government arrogance, yet another outrage”. Puglia signaled its “firm and clear opposition”.
As Scanziamo le Scorie’s spokesperson, Pasquale Stigliani — who was there in 2003 — recently wrote to me, “the nightmare is back”. But, he added, “the mobilization continues!” https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2021/11/28/the-brigands-regroup-in-basilicata/
Bellona signs open letter to prevent nuclear energy and fossil gas from being labelled as green

(Signed by 129 reputable European and international organisations)
Granting nuclear and fossil gas the label of sustainability would undermine the EU’s climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal. Olaf ScholzFederal Minister of Finance
and Vice Chancellor
11016 Berlin
Germany
Dear Federal Minister,
We are extremely concerned by the announcement of the European Commission’s President, Ursula von der Leyen, to likely label both nuclear energy and fossil gas as sustainable in the context of the EU’s taxonomy. According to media coverage, it was the absence of a strong German voice against nuclear in the European Council on 21/22 October that directly contributed to this decision. In your role as current finance minister and future Chancellor, we call on you to swiftly and decisively confirm the German veto against labelling nuclear as a sustainable form of energy and highlight that the Commission’s attempt to shape this discussion during the sensitive time of a new government being formed in Germany is not acceptable.
The EU taxonomy regulation is meant to provide guidelines for the necessary future-oriented investments for Europe’s economic transition. Nuclear energy, however, is unsustainable due to severe safety risks, environmental pollution and the unsolved waste problem. Fossil gas emits large quantities of climate-damaging greenhouse gases, especially methane, along its extraction and transport chain. Granting nuclear and fossil gas the label of sustainability would undermine the EU’s climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal.
Dear Federal Minister, Germany has embarked upon a clear path to phase out nuclear power by the end of next year. NGOs from across Europe count on you to take an equally clear stance against nuclear energy but also fossil gas at the European level. more https://bellona.org/news/climate-change/2021-11-bellona-signs-open-letter-to-take-action-to-prevent-nuclear-energy-and-fossil-gas-from-being-labelled-as-green
These 129 reputable European and international organisations have signed up to letter opposing inclusion of nuclear and gas as being ”sustainable” and ”green”.

| France Nature Environnement, France CEE Bankwatch Network European Environmental Bureau (EEB) The Green Tank, Greece Umanotera – Slovenian Foundation for Sustainable Development, Slovenia Umweltinstitut München e.V., Germany Socio-ecological union international Climate Strategy Group Andy Gheorghiu Consulting, Germany Green Liberty, Latvia 10 BürgerBegehren Klimaschutz Bürgerbewegung Finanzwende, Germany AnsvarligFremtid, Denmark Klimabevægelsen i Danmark (350 Denmark), Denmark Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V., Germany BirdLife Europe uranium-network.org, Germany eco-union, Spain Mouvement Ecologique (FoE-Luxembourg), Luxemburg urgewald, Germany 20 .ausgestrahlt, Germany 350.org Europe Deutscher Naturschutzring, Germany Stowarzyszenie Pracownia na rzecz Wszystkich Istot, Poland Legambiente, Italy Carbon Market Watch Health and Environment Justice Support (HEJSupport) Counter Balance ZERO – Association for the Sustainability of the Earth System, Portugal Clean Air Action Group, Hungary 30 Alofa Tuvalu, Tuvalu Réseau pour la transition énergétique CLER, France Creatura Think & Do Tank, Finland Women Against Nuclear Power, Finland Women for Peace, Finland The Alliance of the Associations Polish Green Network, Poland FMKK – The Swedish Anti Nuclear Movement, Sweden Polish Ecological Club Mazovian Branch, Poland Stowarzyszenie Ekologiczne EKO-UNIA, Poland Stowarzyszenie Ekologiczno-Kulturalne “Wspólna Ziemia”, Poland 40 Arbeitskreis Indianer Nordamerikas, Austria EuroNatur Stiftung, Germany Our Fish E3G – Third Generation Environmentalism Bioland e.V., Germany Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V., Germany Germanwatch e.V., Germany Fair Finance International National Society of Conservationists – Friends of the Earth Hungary, Hungary Nucléaire Stop Kernenergie – Belgium 50 Tegengas/Dégaze – Belgium IPPNW (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War), German affiliate, Germany Urgenda Foundation, The Netherlands Focus Association for Sustainable Development, Slovenia Milieudefensie, The Netherlands Za Zemiata/Friends of the Earth Bulgaria, Bulgaria Fair Finance Guide, Sweden Corporate Europe Observatory Jihočeské matky, z.s., Czech Republic | WEED e.V. – World Economy, Ecology and Development, Germany 60ShareAction Global Witness Reclaim Finance, FranceFossielvrij NL, The Netherlands Bürgerinitiative “Kein Atommüll in Ahaus” e.V., GermanyThe Peace Movement of Orust, Sweden Global Nature Fund, Germany Climate Action Network International Transport & Environment NewClimate Institute gGmbH, Germany 70 Miljöringen lovisa Finland Réaction en chaîne humaine pour l’arrêt du nucléaire France Calla – Association for Preservation of the Environment, Czech republic Réseau “Sortir du nucléaire”, France BI “Stoppt Temelin”, Germany GLOBAL 2000 – Friends of the Earth Austria, Austria Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto (Finnish Association for Nature Conservation), Finland Forum Ökologie & Papier, Germany Plattform gegen Atomgefahren Salzburg (PLAGE), Austria Gas Free Pensions, Europe 80 Réseau Action Climat France PSR / IPPNW Switzerland (Physicians for Social Respon sibility /International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) Greenpeace Begegnungszentrum für Aktive Gewaltlosigkeit, Austria Hiilivapaa Suomi, Finland Food & Water Action Europe, Europe International Network for Sustainable Energy – Europe ReCommon, Italy Inter-Environnement Wallonie, Belgique 90 Campagna “Per il Clima Fuori dal Fossile”, Italy Movimento No TAP/SNAM Brindisi, Italy Redazione emergenzaclimatica.it, Italy BankTrack, the Netherlands TerraBlu, Italy Bellona Europa, Belgium Bellona Deutschland, Germany Forum Ambientalista O.d.V., Italy Climate Action Network, Europe Associazione Tarantola Rubra, Italy 100 Friends of the Earth, Europe Trivelle Zero Molise, Italy Environmental Coalition on Standards, Belgium Collettivo No al Fossile Civitavecchia, Italy WWF Forlì-Cesena, Italy Coordinamento ravennate Fuori dal Fossile, Italy The Swedish Anti-Nuclear Movement, Branch Gävle, Sweden NOAH Friends of the Earth Denmark Wiener Plattform Atomkraftfrei, Austria Parents For Future Vienna, Austria 110 Trivelle Zero Marche, Italy Parents for Future Gütersloh, Germany A Sud, Italy European Alliance for the Self-determination of Indigenous Peoples, Austria/France/Germany/Switzerland Mom Loves Taiwan Forum Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft e.V., Germany WISE Netherlands atomstopp_atomkraftfrei leben!, Austria Freistädter Mütter gegen Atomgefahr, Austria Grandparents For Future Austria 120 Parents For Future Oberösterreich, Austria Frauen für den Frieden Schweiz Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland (BUND) e.V – Friends of the Earth Germany, Germany nternational Commission for the Protection of the Alps (CIPRA International), Liechtenstein Rete “Legalità per il clima”, Europe Collectif anti-nucléaire Ouest, France Fédération anti-nucléaire Bretagne, France GasExit Greenpeace, Russia 129 |
No greenwashing in Europe to save the nuclear industry!

No “greenwashing” to save nuclear power! While several states of the
European Union support atomic energy, a collective of associations
dismantles clichés on nuclear power and reminds us that in 2020, renewable
energies (excluding hydraulic) have exceeded the nuclear energy production.
Liberation 19th Nov 2021
In Wales, strong opposition to UK plan for small nuclear reactors – too slow, dangerous, super costly compared to quick cheap renewables.

Nuclear set to return to Wylfa and Trawsfynydd as Rolls-Royce secures funding for mini-reactors. Nuclear power looks set to return to Wales after Rolls-Royce secured £450m for a venture to build mini nuclear reactors. Trawsfynydd and Wylfa are understood to be two of the sites being lined up for the multi-billion pound mini-power stations.The company hopes to build five by 2031, and then another eleven in the years that follow.
The UK Government have announced that they will match a £245m investment made by a consortium made up of Rolls-Royce, BNF Resources and the US generator Exelon Generation with £210 of their own. Rolls-Royce has previously said that there was a “pretty high probability” Trawsfynydd could house the first reactor by the early 2030s.
Plans for new nuclear reactors have however already attracted opposition in Wales. Anti-nuclear groups have already criticised the plans, saying that the emphasis should be placed on green renewable energy instead. Dylan Morgan of PAWB (People Against Wylfa B) said last month: “We have an immediate crisis now. Building huge reactors at a nuclear power station take at least 15 years. “Nuclear power is slow, dangerous and extortionately expensive.
It will do nothing to address the current energy crisis, neither will it be effective to counter climate change.
“The UK and Welsh governments should divert resources and support away from wasteful and outdated nuclear power projects towards developing renewable technologies that are much cheaper and can provide faster and more sustainable solutions to the energy crisis and the challenges of climate change.”
Nation Cymru 9th Nov 2021
https://nation.cymru/news/nuclear-set-to-return-to-wylfa-and-trawsfynydd-as-rolls-royce-secures-funding-for-mini-reactors/
How Bodega Head almost ended up with a nuclear power plant – but a resistant commmunity won.
How Bodega Head almost ended up with a nuclear power plant, https://www.sonomacountygazette.com/sonoma-county-news/how-bodega-head-almost-ended-up-with-a-nuclear-power-plant/. TOM AUSTIN. November 8, 2021 Bodega Bay, and nearby Bodega, have deeper histories than most Sonoma County towns. Being a pristine, protected natural harbor will do that for you. Bodega Bay was nearly the landing spot for Sir Francis Drake, although recent finds have pretty conclusively held that Drake’s Bay in nearby Pt. Reyes is properly named. Bodega Bay was named after Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra, an explorer for the Spanish Navy –except where HE landed was nearby Tomales Bay. And of course both seaside hamlets are famous for being the locale for the classic Hitchcock thriller “The Birds.”
However, the most significant happening in Bodega Bay is of much more modern vintage. In 1958, four full years before Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” ignited the modern environmental movement, PG&E was planning the world’s first commercially viable nuclear power plant. In an absolutely characteristic example of Big Power’s public instincts, they had chosen scenic Bodega Head as the location for this Atomic Age wonder. “What could go wrong?” they chirped. “Nuclear power is clean, safe and limitless!”
Of course, it wasn’t just scenic wonder at stake here. Bodega Head, as most people know, is within spitting distance of the San Andreas Fault (running along the shoreward side of the bay), and even closer to two smaller faults straddling Bodega Head itself.
The full story of the fight over the Bodega Head nuclear plant would be book-length, so please pardon my brevity here. The cast of characters are timeless: on the “pro” side: PG&E itself, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, and nuclear advocates across political spectra (at the time, nuclear was considered by many environmentalists to be less damaging than, for example, hydroelectric power from dams). On the “con” side was the whole spectrum: The Sierra Club (or at least factions within it) was concerned about the loss of a wild and scenic place: the local ranchers and fishermen were concerned about the dangers to their livelihood; the nascent New Left that started gaining steam in the early ‘60s were concerned about the antidemocratic nature of the pro-business, pro-development organizations pushing for the plant.
The fight was long, protracted and dirty. From 1958 to 1962, as opposition was just coalescing, PG&E continued planning and started building, getting a series of approvals and permits from apparently compliant state and local governments. The building for the main reactor, located on the harbor side of the Head, included a 70-foot-deep circular pit. As construction continued, the opponents were educating far and wide about the dangers of nuclear power, the earthquake danger, the thermal effects on local fisheries and more. In 1962, “Silent Spring” was published, and the environmental movement grew ever faster: musicians were performing at benefits and writing anti-nuclear songs. However, it was the earthquake danger that eventually served as the deal-breaker: UC Berkeley Conservation Editor David Pesonen, one of the leaders of the opposition, hired Geologist Pierre Saint-Amand to consult on the suitability of the proposed plant site. Saint-Amand found a “spectacular” earthquake fault slicing directly through the deep pit. His testimony that “a worse foundation condition… would be difficult to envision.” His argument was the tipping point, as political supporters started peeling away from PG&E, who at length threw in the towel and suspended construction in October 1963.
What remains at the site today is a quiet spot favored by songbirds. Rainwater filled the pit and turned it into a pond. The rest, you know: when you spot whales at the Head, or walk the trails nearby. If you venture a little bit north, you find the Kortum trail, named after local environmentalist Bill Kortum (1927-2014), one of many citizen leaders of the fight. The reverberations are still being felt today.
High time to rid Wales of plans for costly, risky Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

Leanne Wood: My column in The National two weeks ago argued for a transition away from manufacturing weapons of war to firing up our greeneconomy. Isn’t it also high time we rid Wales of the scourge of nuclear
power and redirect resources into clean, renewable energy? We have that opportunity now. Wales is a nuclear-free zone but for how much longer?
Plans to resurrect Wylfa B are effectively dead, even though some politicians continue to tout the idea. Attention has turned, instead, to the Trawsfynydd site where Rolls Royce is proposing a Small Modular Nuclear Reactor (SMNR), the latest experiment in nuclear fission technology. Except the old problems of safety and cost of storage and waste disposal haven’t gone away.
The first SMNR to be approved last year in the US was met by fierce criticism from notable scientists, including Professor MV Ramana of the University of Columbia who described the project as “risky and expensive”. Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, highlighted ‘safety gaps’ in the design. Still
the Welsh Government, with the backing of Westminster, continues with costly feasibility studies.
The National (Wales) 10th Oct 2021
https://www.thenational.wales/news/19637359.wales-needs-forget-nuclear-power-forever/
Nuclear is Not Green – campaigners from Suffolk travel to COP26
Campaigners from Suffolk have travelled to COP26 host city Glasgow to
protest over Sizewell C, which they say is not the solution to the climate
emergency. Stop Sizewell C, two Suffolk Coastal 2019 General Election
candidates and local supporters unfurled a “Nuclear is Not Green” banner in
the centre of the city.
East Anglian Daily Times 2nd Nov 2021
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/stop-sizewell-c-protest-at-cop26-in-glasgow-8458020
World without nuclear weapons remains a goal after Sunao Tsuboi’s death
October 29, 2021 (Mainichi Japan) Sunao Tsuboi, a champion of the anti-nuclear movement, has died at age 96. He had served as a representative member of the Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organizations and chairman of the Hiroshima Prefectural Confederation of A-bomb Sufferers Organizations. For many years, Tsuboi led nuclear disarmament activism and dedicated his life to calling for a world without nuclear weapons, while telling himself and others to “never give up.”
Tsuboi himself was a survivor of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. He continued to share his experience, revealing the inhumaneness of nuclear arms………..
It was because Tsuboi and other hibakusha persistently shared stories about their experiences outside Japan that the inhumane nature of nuclear weapons became widely known across the world. And this led to the enforcement of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which bans nuclear arms and related activities.
When then U.S. President Barack Obama visited Hiroshima as the first sitting U.S. president to do so in May 2016, Tsuboi said to him, “It (dropping the atomic bomb) was one of the mistakes humanity made. We have to overcome that, and head for the future.”
These words stemmed from Tsuboi’s desire for peace, based on his belief that hatred is fruitless.
Grave challenges still remain after Tsuboi’s departure………..
The number of hibakusha has now declined to about 127,000 and their average age is approaching 84. Anti-nuclear activist and hibakusha Sumiteru Taniguchi, who led the movement in Nagasaki, the second city to be bombed in 1945, passed away in 2017. We will eventually enter a time when there are no hibakusha left in the world.
“An uphill path may continue, but I’m not going to give up and I’ll continue working on eliminating these dreadful weapons from the world,” Tsuboi once said. Succeeding generations must take the baton from him. https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20211029/p2a/00m/0op/028000c
Growing movement to stop the dumping of radioactive wastes into the Severn Estuary
Save the Severn Estuary is a non-partisan coalition of scientists,
experts, individuals and organisations calling on the Marine Management
Organisation (MMO) to revoke the license granted to EDF (Électricité de
France) which allows for the dumping of sediment contaminated by the
Hinkley nuclear power stations in the Severn Estuary near Portishead.
This is a consequence of building a water intake for the new power station which
in itself will kill millions of fish when operational. Please also make a
donation towards the costs of legal action we are taking. We have set up a
company for this purpose in order to make the fundraising easier. We are
represented by Leigh Day, and the legal case seeks the quashing of EDF’s
license. In order to proceed with a judicial review against the MMO, we are
aiming to raise £60,000 to cover all of the costs associated with the
legal action. We need your support: please contribute and share this page
now!
Crowd Justice (accessed) 22nd Oct 2021
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/save-the-severn-estuary/
Stop Sizewell C anti nuclear campaigners taking their fight to London, and the UK government

Campaigners fighting to stop a new nuclear power station being built on
the Suffolk coast have taken their battle to Number 10 Downing Street.
Ahead of the Chancellor’s spending review and Budget, the Stop Sizewell C
group visited key locations in the capital with its message and campaign
video on a digital Advan.
East Anglian Daily Times 20th Oct 2021
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/stop-sizewell-c-campaign-visits-downing-street-8428226
Sizewell C nuclear station – a white elephant that will irreversibly damage the environment

Campaigners protesting the building of Sizewell C have responded with
frustration to EDF’s £250 million package of funding to mitigate the
impacts of the proposed site. The biggest concern for those against the
project was the money put towards environmental causes – £78 million for
an independent environmental body to enhance the landscape of the area and
£22 million for investment in landscape impact mitigation and creation of
wildlife and habitat areas.
“It’s notable that by far the biggest sum –
£100 million – is for environmental projects,” said Alison Downes from
Stop Sizewell C. “This work will have to be ongoing for decades – through
the life of the station and potentially decommissioning – to make any
significant difference.”
“The environmental funding is simply a
recognition of the long term and irreversible damage they will do to the
environment,” said Pete Wilkinson of Together Against Sizewell C. “The
rest is a measure of the damage to this community EDF intends to inflict
for what will be a huge white elephant on our eroding, heritage coast.”
East Anglian Daily Times 15th Oct 2021
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sizewell-c-campaigners-react-to-money-plans-8415128
-
Archives
- April 2026 (114)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS


