opposition to nuclear « nuclear-news

Lithuania standing firm against sales of electricity from Belarus’ new nuclear power station

Lithuania spurns Baltic presidents’ meeting amid nuclear power rift

KURESSAARE, Saaremaa, Estonia (Reuters) 25 June 20, – Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda refused to attend a planned meeting with his Estonian and Latvian counterparts on Thursday, saying he did so after the countries failed to agree to ban electricity purchases from a new nuclear power plant in Belarus.

Lithuania has a law banning all Belarusian power sales after the power plant gets operational.

The Estonian president’s office, which hosted the meeting, said that Nauseda, who is dealing with a reshuffle of his team, “decided to stay home at the last minute due to internal affairs”.

Lithuania wants all the three countries to sign up to banning sales of Belarusian electricity after the nuclear plant comes online, binning an earlier draft agreement that only pledged to help keep the energy from being sold in Lithuania…….

Lithuania sees the nuclear power plant, built by Russia’s Atomstroyexport near its capital and financed by Moscow with a $10 billion loan, as threat to its safety and national security, something Belarus disagrees with.

“The President’s opinion is that negotiations should be finished first,” Nauseda’s spokesman told Reuters in a statement.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-baltics-energy-belarus/lithuania-spurns-baltic-presidents-meeting-amid-nuclear-power-rift-idUSKBN23W27C

June 27, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Belarus, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Coalition for Responsible Energy Development wants a stop to nuclear expansion in Canada

New Coalition Wants All Nuclear Expansion Abandoned, https://www.country94.ca/2020/06/24/new-coalition-wants-all-nuclear-expansion-abandoned/ Saint John, NB, Canada / Country 94, Stephanie Sirois, June 24, 2020 A new coalition wants the provincial and federal governments to close down coal burning stations and abandon all plans for nuclear expansion.

The Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick includes public interest organizations and individuals and is intended to advocate for responsible energy development.

David Thompson is a project coordinator for CRED-NB.

“I guess a number of people in the province were looking at organizations also, were looking at the way energy was proposed to be developed and the kind of energy we had here and we felt that something a lot better could happen,” he said.

Thompson said there is a need to reduce the demand for energy in the province by eliminating energy waste and maximizing energy efficiency.

“We respond to climate change and to promote emission-free and waste-free energy, that sort of thing and to get on the bandwagon of the new renewable energies,” he said.

CRED-NB wants the provincial and federal government to invest in sources of renewable energy such as wind, solar, geo-thermal, tidal, certain types of bio-energy and water-driven power.

“I think everyone wants more cost-effective energy and energy that’s not going to leave behind waste or pollute our environment and we have to get energy in place rather quickly now to deal with climate change.”

The coalition is calling upon governments to invest in less costly and safer renewable energy, coupled with energy efficiency and conservation programs. CRED-NB says this will create more jobs and economic activity in New Brunswick.

June 25, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, opposition to nuclear, politics | Leave a comment

Anti-nuclear resistance in Russia: problems protests, reprisals

Mayak victims’ organizer, Nadezhda Kutepova, a Nuclear-Free Future Award winner, was eventually forced to flee the country. (Photo: ©Orla Connolly)

Standing up to Rosatom

https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2020/06/21/standing-up-to-rosatom/ June 21, 2020 by beyondnuclearinternational

Anti-nuclear resistance in Russia: problems protests, reprisals

The following is a report from the Russian Social Ecological Union (RSEU)/ Friends of the Earth Russia, slightly edited for length. You can read the report in full here. It is a vitally important document exposing the discrimination and fear tactics used against anti-nuclear organizers in Russia and details their courageous acts of defiance in order to bring the truth of Russia’s nuclear sector to light.

Rosatom is a Russian state-owned corporation which builds and operates nuclear power plants in Russia and globally. The state-run nuclear industry in Russia has a long history of nuclear crises, including the Kyshtym disaster in 1957 and Chernobyl in 1986. Yet Rosatom plans to build dozens of nuclear reactors in Russia, to export its deadly nuclear technologies to other countries, and then to import their hazardous nuclear waste.

This report is a collection of events and details about the resistance to Russian state nuclear corporation, Rosatom, and other activities that have led to the pollution of the environment and violation of human rights. Social and environmental conflicts created by Rosatom have been left unresolved for years, while at the same time, environmental defenders who have raised these issues, have consistently experienced reprisals.

Nuclear energy: failures and Lies

Continue reading →

June 22, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, Russia | Leave a comment

Bradwell nuclear project “unsustainable, unsuitable and unacceptable” – and not a done deal

Clacton Gazette 20th June 2020, CAMPAIGNERS fighting plans for a new nuclear power station at Bradwell are calling for the proposals to be scrapped. Opposition group Banng – Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group – has prepared a 13,000-word response to the stage one public consultation.

It says the Bradwell site is “unsustainable, unsuitable and unacceptable”. The Bradwell B project is
a joint operation between CGN and EDF Energy. Banng chairman Andy Blowers said: “This is not a done deal as CGN would have us believe. A new nuclear power station is not needed, and especially it is not needed at this site.”

Campaigners say the site is not sustainable because climate change and rising sea levels leave it at risk of flooding. They also say it will destroy the landscape. Mr Blowers said: “The blunt truth is that we cannot tell what conditions will be like by the end of the century let alone beyond, when highly radioactive spent fuel and other nuclear wastes will still be on a site that could be unviable.

https://www.clactonandfrintongazette.co.uk/news/north_essex_news/18528575.campaigners-call-bradwell-b-nuclear-plans-scrapped/

June 22, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Anti–nuclear resistance in Russia: problems, protests, reprisals

Anti–nuclear resistance in Russia: problems, protests, reprisals [Full Report 2020]

RNA INTERNATIONAL·FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 2020·

Produced by RSEU’s program “Against nuclear and radioaсtive threats”

Report “Anti–nuclear resistance in Russia: problems, protests, reprisals” Produced by RSEU’s program “Against nuclear and radioaсtive threats”

Published: Saint Petersburg, Russia, 2020

Authors: RSEU experts edited by Tatyana Pautova
Editor and translator: Vitaly Servetnik
English editor: Anna WhiteCover
illustration: Anastasia Semenova
Layout: Sergey Fedulov

The Russian Social Ecological Union (RSEU)/ Friends of the Earth Russia is a non-governmental, non-profit and member based democratic organization,established in 1992. RSEU brings together environmental organizations and activistsfrom across Russia. All RSEU activities are aimed at nature conservation, protection ofhealth and the well-being of people in Russia and around the world.In 2014, RSEU became the Russian member of Friends of the Earth International.http://rusecounion.ru/eng
Saitnt Petersburg 2020

Table of Contents

Introduction…………………………………4
Nuclear energy: failures and lies…….5
Expired reactors……………………………6
Decommissioning problems…………..7
Uranium mining protest………………..8

Rosatom Importing uranium waste..9
The Mayak plant: Rosatom’s dirty face………10
Struggle against nuclear repository……………11

Rosatom’s ‘death plants’…………………………..12
A road through a radioactive graveyard……..14
Conclusion: nuclear power is a problem, not a solution….14

References……15

Introduction

Rosatom

is a Russian state-owned corporation which builds and operates nuclear power plants in Russia and globally. The state-run nuclear industry in Russia has a long history of nuclear crises, including the Kyshtym disaster in 1957 and Chernobyl in 1986. Yet Rosatom plans to build dozens of nuclear reactors in Russia, to export its deadly nuclear technologies to other countries, and then to import their hazardous nuclear waste.This report is a collection of events and details about the resistance to Russian state nuclear corporation, Rosatom, and other activities that have led to the pollution of the environment and violation of human rights. Social and environmental conflicts created by Rosatom have been left unresolved for years, while at the same time, environmental defenders who have raised these issues, have consistently experienced reprisals.

Nuclear energy: failures and lies

Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear corporation, is heir to the Soviet atomic industry, despite all attempts to appear otherwise. Nuclear disasters still affect us and many of their long-term problems have been left unresolved. Upon review of the recent accidents that have occured at nuclear facilities in Russia,it is clear that few improvements have been made. We see this again and again in the examples mentioned in this report.

• In the autumn of 2017, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) discovered a concentration of the technogenic radionuclide ruthenium–106 in the atmosphere of several European countries.

(1) A number of experts linked the ruthenium release to the Mayaplant in the Chelyabinsk Region (2-3), but Rosatom continues to deny this.• On the 8th of August 2019, an explosion occurred during a test of a liquid rocket launcher at a marine train-ing ground in Nenoksa Village of Arkhangelsk Region. The administration of the city of Severodvinsk, 30 km from the scene, reported an increase in radiation levels, but later denied the claim. The Ministry of Emergency registered an increase of 20 times (to2 µSv/h) around Severodvinsk (4), while the Ministry of Defense reported the radiation level as normal. Only two days later,

Rosatom reported that five employees were killed and three were injured at the test site. According to media reports, two employees of the Ministry of Defense were also killed and three were injured, and medical personnel who helped the victims were not informed about the riskof radiation exposure (5).

Expired reactors

More than 70% of Russian nuclear reactors are outdated. They were developed in the 1970 s and were designed to operate for only 30 years. The lifetimes of such reactors have been extended by twice the design limit (6).

Rosatom’s strategy also includes a dangerous increase of the reactor’s thermal power.

Rostekhnadzor (Federal Environmental, Industrial and Nuclear Supervision Service)

grants licenses for lifetime extensions without an environmental impact assessment and without public consultations.

Especially worrying are the lifetime extensions of reactor-types with design flaws. Chernobyl–type (RBMK)reactors in Leningrad, Smolensk and Kursk regions are still in operation after exceeding their lifetimes, as well as VVER–types, such as at the Kola nuclear power plant (NPP) in Murmansk region. Neither type has a sufficient protective shell to contain radioactivity in case of an accident or to protect the reactor from an external impact or influence. (7)……

References

1 https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/34408202 https://www.bfs.de/SharedDocs/Kurzmeldungen/ BfS/EN/2017/1121-ruthenium-106.html (Eng.)

3 https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16750 (Eng.)
4 https://7×7–journal.ru/articles/2019/08/09/admin-istraciya–severodvinska–udalila–s–oficialnogo–saj-ta–reliz–o–skachke–radiacii–v–gorode–posle–vzry-va–pri–ispytanii–reaktivnoj–ustanovki–baza–soobshi-la–o–shesti–postradavshih–ot–oblucheniya

5 https://novayagazeta.ru/arti-cles/2019/08/20/81669–fonila–vannaya–voennye–uvezli–ee–na–kamaze6 http://rusecounion.ru/eng/nuclearstatusre-port2019 (Eng.)

https://www.facebook.com/notes/rna-international/antinuclear-resistance-in-russia-problems-protests-reprisals-full-report-2020/3498100043537008/

June 6, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, politics, Reference, Russia, wastes | Leave a comment

Beyond Nuclear Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging High-Level Radioactive Waste Dump

Beyond Nuclear Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging High-Level Radioactive Waste Dump for Entire Inventory of U.S. “Spent” Reactor Fuel, Common Dreams, 5 June 20

Petitioner charges the Nuclear Regulatory Commission knowingly violated U.S. Nuclear Waste Policy Act and up-ended settled law prohibiting transfer of ownership of spent fuel to the federal government until a permanent underground repository is ready to receive it.

WASHINGTON – Today the non-profit organization Beyond Nuclear filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit requesting review of an April 23, 2020 order and an October 29, 2018 order by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), rejecting challenges to Holtec International/Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance’s application to build a massive “consolidated interim storage facility” (CISF) for nuclear waste in southeastern New Mexico. Holtec proposes to store as much as 173,000 metric tons of highly radioactive irradiated or “spent” nuclear fuel – more than twice the amount of spent fuel currently stored at U.S. nuclear power reactors – in shallowly buried containers on the site.

But according to Beyond Nuclear’s petition, the NRC’s orders “violated the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act by refusing to dismiss an administrative proceeding that contemplated issuance of a license permitting federal ownership of used reactor fuel at a commercial fuel storage facility.”

Since it contemplates that the federal government would become the owner of the spent fuel during transportation to and storage at its CISF, Holtec’s license application should have been dismissed at the outset, Beyond Nuclear’s appeal argues. Holtec has made no secret of the fact that it expects the federal government will take title to the waste, which would clear the way for it to be stored at its CISF, and this is indeed the point of building the facility. But that would directly violate the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA), which prohibits federal government ownership of spent fuel unless and until a permanent underground repository is up and running. No such repository has been licensed in the U.S. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) most recent estimate for the opening of a geologic repository is the year 2048 at the earliest.

In its April 23 decision, in which the NRC rejected challenges to the license application, the four NRC Commissioners admitted that the NWPA would indeed be violated if title to spent fuel were transferred to the federal government so it could be stored at the Holtec facility. But they refused to remove the license provision in the application which contemplates federal ownership of the spent fuel. Instead, they ruled that approving Holtec’s application in itself would not involve NRC in a violation of federal law, and that therefore they could go forward with approving the application, despite its illegal provision. According to the NRC’s decision, “the license itself would not violate the NWPA by transferring the title to the fuel, nor would it authorize Holtec or [the U.S. Department of Energy] to enter into storage contracts.” (page 7). The NRC Commissioners also noted with approval that “Holtec hopes that Congress will amend the law in the future.” (page 7).

“This NRC decision flagrantly violates the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which prohibits an agency from acting contrary to the law as issued by Congress and signed by the President,” said Mindy Goldstein, an attorney for Beyond Nuclear. “The Commission lacks a legal or logical basis for its rationale that it may issue a license with an illegal provision, in the hopes that Holtec or the Department of Energy won’t complete the illegal activity it authorized. The buck must stop with the NRC.”

“Our claim is simple,” said attorney Diane Curran, another member of Beyond Nuclear’s legal team. “The NRC is not above the law, nor does it stand apart from it.”………

“When Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and refused to allow nuclear reactor licensees to transfer ownership of their irradiated reactor fuel to the DOE until a permanent repository was up and running, it acted wisely,” said Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste specialist for Beyond Nuclear. “It understood that spent fuel remains hazardous for millions of years, and that the only safe long-term strategy for safeguarding irradiated reactor fuel is to place it in a permanent repository for deep geologic isolation from the living environment. Today, the NWPA remains the public’s best protection against a so-called ‘interim’ storage facility becoming a de facto permanent, national, surface dump for radioactive waste. But if we ignore it or jettison the law, communities like southeastern New Mexico can be railroaded by the nuclear industry and its friends in government, and forced to accept mountains of forever deadly high-level radioactive waste other states are eager to offload.”

In addition to impacting New Mexico, shipping the waste to the CISF site would also endanger 43 other states plus the District of Columbia, because it would entail hauling 10,000 high risk, high-level radioactive waste shipments on their roads, rails, and waterways, posing risks of radioactive release all along the way……….

Besides threatening public health and safety, evading federal law to license CISF facilities would also impact the public financially. Transferring title and liability for spent fuel from the nuclear utilities that generated it to DOE would mean that federal taxpayers would have to pay for its so-called “interim” storage, to the tune of many billions of dollars. That’s on top of the many billions ratepayers and taxpayers have already paid to fund a permanent geologic repository that hasn’t yet materialized. https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2020/06/04/beyond-nuclear-files-federal-lawsuit-challenging-high-level-radioactive-waste?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter

June 6, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, opposition to nuclear, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Uranium mining protests in Russia

Anti–nuclear resistance in Russia: problems, protests, reprisals [Full Report 2020] Report “Anti–nuclear resistance in Russia: problems, protests, reprisals” Produced by RSEU’s program “Against nuclear and radioaсtive threats”

Published: Saint Petersburg, Russia, 2020

“……..Uranium mining protest
In the Kurgan region, Rosatom’s subsidiary company, Dalur, has been mining uranium and the local communities fear an environmental disaster. In the summer of 2019, the state environmental appraisal revealed a discrepancy between Dalur’s documentation and the Russian legislation

requirements, but the company started the deposit’s development anyway at the end of 2019.(22)

• The ‘Dobrovolnoe’ uranium deposit is located in a floodplain of the Tobol river basin. This means that all the water that flows into the river will pass through the aquifer, flushing out radioactive and toxic compounds into the surrounding environment. (23)

• Since 2017, Kurgan activists have been protesting against the development of the deposit. They have appealed to the authorities and begun protests. One of their videos, ‘Uranium is Death for Kurgan’, has already reached 50,000 views. (24)

Several times, activists have tried to start a referendum and demand an independent environmental review, but so far, have received only refusals from the local officials.In February 2018, Natalia Shulyatieva, the spouse of activist Andrey Shulyatiev and mother of three children, died after falling into a coma. (25)

Activists believe this occurred in reaction to learning that Dalur had filed a lawsuit against her husband, accusing him of undermining the company’s reputation. The lawsuit was withdrawn following Shulyatieva’s death. (26)

In March 2020, the Federal Security Service in the Kurgan Region initiated a criminal case against local eco–activist Lyubov Kudryashova for her ‘public justification of terrorism using the Internet’. (27)

Activists attribute her persecution to her work at the Public Monitoring Fund for the Environmental Condition and the Population Welfare which she led back in 2017. The Foundation has repeatedly published information on the possible environmental damage resulting from Dalur’s mining activity. (28)

Rosatom Importing uranium waste
In the fall of 2019, environmentalists revealed that radioactive and toxic waste (uranium hexafluoride, UF6)were being imported from Germany through the port of Amsterdam into Russia. This is the waste from the uranium enrichment process which will be sent to the Urals or Siberia and stored in containers above the ground. Thus, under the auspices of a commercial transaction, the German uranium–enriching enterprise, Urenco, avoids its nuclear waste problem, while Rosatom profits by taking the hazardous waste into Russia.

• In response to this transaction, the groups Russian Social–Ecological Union, Ecodefense and Greenpeace Russia called on Russian civil society to protest. More than 30 organisations and movements joined the common statement (29), and various demonstrations have taken place in Russia, as well as in Germany and the Netherlands. (30)

As a result of protests, the question of importing radioactive waste was taken up by the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg (31) and the transportation of the waste was delayed for three months.However, in March 2020, when people in Russia were further restricted from protests during the Covid–19 virus quarantine, the import of radioactive waste was resumed through the port of the less populated town of Ust–Luga in Leningrad Region. Additional organisations and residents of the Leningrad region then decided to join the earlier anti–nuclear statement and protest. (32)

• Following these protests, a number of activists have faced persecution. Like Sosnovy Bor, Novouralskis a nuclear industry–dominated and closed city of Sverdlovsk region, and is the end destination of the transported uranium hexafluoride. The city has rarely seen protests before. In response to a series of one–person protests, authorities have initiated legal cases against three pensioners in the beginning of December 2019 (33). Charges were later dismissed. Another example is Rashid Alimov, an expert from Greenpeace Russia, who protested in the center of Saint Petersburg. Later the same day, two police officers together with six other people without uniform detained Alimov from in front of his house. He then faced charges and a substantial fine. (34)

Charges were later dropped.Environmental organisations that had previously opposed the import of uranium waste were listed as Foreign Agents.

Ecodefense was the first of such, listed in 2014. In 2019, the pressure continued and the organisation’s leader, Alexandra Korolyova, was targeted. (35)

Five criminal cases were initiated against her, which forced her to leave the country. (36)…..”

https://www.facebook.com/notes/rna-international/antinuclear-resistance-in-russia-problems-protests-reprisals-full-report-2020/3498100043537008/

June 6, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, Russia, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Uranium | Leave a comment

Resistance developing to EDF’s plan to store nuclear waste at Belleville-sur-Loire

Nuclear: EDF plans Belleville-sur-Loire to store nuclear waste, resistance is getting organized https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/centre-val-de-loire/cher/nucleaire-edf-envisage-belleville-loire-stocker-dechets-nucleaires-resistance-s-organise-1835296.html EDF has not yet chosen the site that will host the project for a national radioactive waste storage center, but the Belleville-sur-Loire plant is expected. The project will be formalized before the end of 2020. The mobilization is organized.

n 2018, the Reporterre information site revealed that EDF plans to create a radioactive waste storage pool in Belleville-sur-Loire (Cher) to relay the center of La Hague which will soon reach saturation. The affair had then aroused the hostile reaction of the regional council whose president François Bonneau (PS) declared: “the Center-Loire Valley does not have vocation to become the nuclear dustbin of France! ”

Since then, EDF has not said more about its intentions, since transparency is not the main quality of the nuclear industries. But we know that the project to create this new site is a priority, according to the Nuclear Safety Authority. The principle and (important) dimensions of the project have been established. It only remains to choose the most suitable place and for that Belleville has several advantages.

Geographically, the Cher is located in the center of France and several major roads are connected near Belleville. The site also has large land reserves allowing the construction of other nuclear installations since only two reactors out of four possible have been built there. It could therefore easily welcome this vast project which, according to Sortir du nuclear, plans to store 10,000 tonnes of used fuel, including MOX, a highly radioactive product in which uranium and plutonium mix. This pool would be installed on the banks of the Loire for about a century before its hypothetical and distant dismantling.

La région s’oppose à un éventuel projet de stockage des déchets nucléaires

The inhabitants of the Center-Loire Valley usually accept everything The region also presents a political interest for the State and EDF. Its nuclear opponents are usually not very virulent. This is why four plants were installed there when the Bretons, after accepting Brennilis, led the fight with granite stones against the ultimately abandoned Plogoff project.

To change this image, a collective of 15 associations in the Belleville area (Loiret, Cher, Nièvre and Yonne) were formed in late March in the hope of embodying local resistance if the site was chosen. There are resolutely anti-nuclear movements like “Sortir du nuclear” but also environmental defense associations like “Vivre notre Loire”, ADENY or ATTAC. Grouped under the name “Stop Nuclear Pool” the movement is coordinated by activist Catherine Fumé:

“We want to inform local people, especially elected officials who will soon take office, and start creating a balance of power before it is too late. It should be noted that EDF is making the most dangerous choice by centralizing all waste. There are other possibilities such as dry storage in other countries. But for that, France would have to give up producing MOX, this extremely dangerous fuel that must be stored for at least 50 years before final storage, as it is radioactive. ”

Activists are concerned about this choice, which poses a threat to the environment for an indefinite period while the Loire Valley is classified as a UNESCO World Heritage Site and the vineyards of Sancerre and Pouilly are not far away. “We know the financial difficulties of EDF today,” continues Catherine Fumé. With this huge deficit will they have the means to maintain these facilities? Will they still exist in a century? ”

Piscine Nucléaire Stop is asking these questions today when EDF has not yet answered the ones we want to ask it on the subject. But we’ll know more about its intentions in a few months.

June 1, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | France, opposition to nuclear, wastes | Leave a comment

Wildlife charities unite to oppose Sizewell C nuclear power station

East Anglian Daily Times 28th May 2020, Two wildlife charities have united in their opposition to plans for the Sizewell C nuclear power station – and will tell national planning chiefs
it must not go ahead. The RSPB and Suffolk Wildlife Trust (SWT) say they
have not seen evidence that the £14billion project can be built without
detrimentally impacting internationally and nationally important
landscapes, habitats, animals and plants on the Suffolk coast.

Ben McFarland, SWT’s conservation manager, said: “Current plans suggest the
direct loss of nationally important and protected land on Sizewell Belts, a
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). An area between 10-12 hectares
– or roughly ten football pitches – will be covered in concrete. The
loss of this nationally rare fen habitat would be devastating and
irreplaceable.”

On neighbouring land at RSPB Minsmere nature reserve, the
build will bring the Sizewell Estate adjacent to the internationally famous
wildlife haven. It is feared the building work may increase erosion,
upsetting the delicate balance of the reserve. It could affect the water
levels in Minsmere’s ditches, impacting its rare wetland wildlife, which
includes bitterns, water voles, otters and ducks.

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/swt-rspb-unite-to-oppose-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-1-6674364

May 30, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment, opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Opposition to unnecessary, environmentally destructive Sizewell nuclear project

East Anglian Daily Times 27th May 2020, Energy giant EDF is being asked to delay the formal consultation on its plans for a new £14billion nuclear power plant on the Suffolk coast until
after the Covid-19 lockdown restrictions are lifted. Community leaders
believe people need to be able to attend public meetings and other events
as part of the process for the Sizewell C planning application submitted
yesterday.

Some industry observers say this would mean autumn at the
earliest – and a final decision on the project late next year. The
leaders of East Suffolk Council and Suffolk County Council have been
supportive of EDF Energy making the Development Consent Order submission
for permission for the project but are continuing to call on the company to
ensure they talk to the two local authorities before triggering the formal
Section 56 process and timescale which includes a period of formal public
engagement.

Steve Gallant and Matthew Hicks said: “We have written to EDF
Energy asking them to delay the Section 56 process given the current
Government guidance on social distancing, social isolation and public
gatherings. We believe all parties must be satisfied that appropriate
public engagement can take place. “We would like EDF Energy to continue
its discussions with both councils so we can work together to find a
suitable solution that works for all our communities.”

Meanwhile, Pete Wilkinson, chair of Together Against Sizewell C (TASC), has written to all
Suffolk county councillors calling on them to let their hearts rule their
heads and reject the project, which he claims will “irreparably alter
that unique Suffolk character and nature of this tranquil and welcoming
county, transforming it into just another over-developed, car-dominated,
road-centred, urbanised area of the UK like so many others – bland,
conformist and uniform”.

Mr Wilkinson said: “EDF have today applied to
the national planning inspectorate for permission to build two huge nuclear
reactors on a site which is barely big enough to contain them. It requires
the destruction of the 100 year old Coronation Wood for its overspill
facilities. The construction is designed to house two European Pressurised
Reactors generating 3.2 gigawatts of electricity at full power. The
Sizewell B plant has recently reduced its output by 50% at a reported cost
of £50million due to over-supply. This over-supply is not just a
consequence of the covid-19 pandemic. In 2005, the government made plans to
meet a predicted 15% increase in electricity demand by 2020. In fact,
demand has dropped over those 15 years by 16%, an overestimation of demand
by more than 30%. It is axiomatic that Sizewell C is not needed to ‘keep
the lights on’ nor is it an essential infrastructure project.”

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/edf-delay-on-sizewell-c-consultation-1-6672349

May 30, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment, opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Opposition in Canada to nuclear waste dump on agricultural land

Opposition gathering to nuclear fuel disposal vault in South Bruce, The Sun Times, 29 May 20

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization is investigating the suitability of about 600 hectares of rural land it assembled to build a $23-billion buried storage vault for used fuel rods and a testing centre for technologies needed for the project.

NWMO’s other preferred site is also in Ontario, in the Ignace area, northwest of Lake Superior, and feasibility studies are underway for both sites.It would take 10 years to undertake the environmental regulatory approval process. Plans call for construction to begin in 2033 and take about 10 years, with operation starting in 2043, according to the NWMO.

South Bruce Mayor Bob Buckle said in January it seemed to him there was little opposition to the project, but that has changed. At an online South Bruce council meeting Tuesday, Teeswater-area beef and sheep farmer Michelle Stein spoke on behalf of a citizen’s group, Nuclear Tanks, No Thanks, which loosely formed in February.

Her farm is next to one purchased by NWMO for the project northwest of Teeswater, part of the parcel of land where metal-encased spent fuel rods could be buried for thousands of years.

She told council “there’s way too many risks involved with this project and they need to have a referendum to let the community decide. Like we have over 1,500 signatures that were collected before COVID,” before the virus stopped door-knocking, she said by phone Thursday.

“Council just it seemed turned to ignore us and do their own thing.” She noted Buckle was elected with 1,380 votes.

The group has an information website www.protectsouthbruce-nodgr.org, which includes an online petition with some 1,800 signatures, which prior to the pandemic was intended for people who aren’t local to sign…….

Becky Smith, a NWMO spokeswoman said “We’re a farming community. I don’t understand why they’d want to turn us into a mining community, and then bury the world’s most radioactive waste underneath our water table,”

A four-week comment period opened Wednesday and ends June 30 about whether a draft report accurately summarizes public concerns and wishes expressed during workshops held between December and February……..

n January, SON held a community vote which turned down a separate nuclear waste vault proposal, for lower- and mid-level nuclear waste, championed by Ontario Power Generation.

It was to be built in Bruce County too, near the Bruce Power nuclear plant close to Kincardine.

Saugeen First Nation Chief Lester Anoquot said Wednesday he has a letter from NWMO confirming the high-level nuclear waste vault requires First Nation consent.

“We’re continuing dialogue. It’s kind of difficult right now, working remotely,” given the COVID-19 pandemic, he said.

“It will probably go to a community vote again for acceptance or not. I think the process will mirror the one that was just conducted with the last DGR (deep geological repository) proposal.”

The site falls within Saugeen Ojibway Nation’s traditional territory and its support is required for the project to proceed, Belfadhel has said.https://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/news/local-news/opposition-gathering-to-nuclear-fuel-disposal-vault-in-south-bruce

May 30, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, opposition to nuclear, wastes | Leave a comment

UK’s National Trust says new Sizewell C nuclear power station poses threat to rare birds

Times 27th May 2020, New Sizewell C nuclear power station poses threat to rare birds, says
National Trust. A new nuclear power station planned for the Suffolk coast
would threaten rare wildlife on protected heathland, according to the
National Trust.

It has condemned EDF’s application, expected to be
submitted to the Planning Inspectorate tomorrow, to build twin reactors at
Sizewell in a project that the French state-controlled company says would
supply enough low carbon electricity for six million homes, or 7 per cent
of UK power.

The trust owns Dunwich Heath, 140 acres of lowland heathland
that is one of Britain’s rarest habitats and is home to a breeding
population of endangered stone curlews. It has written to the leaders of
East Suffolk council and Suffolk county council to raise concerns about the
proposed £18 billion plant, which EDF would build with the Chinese nuclear
power company China General Nuclear (CGN). Stop Sizewell C, a local
campaign group, said the power stations “would be an expensive bridge to
nowhere: it will suck vital funds away from the technologies and projects
that are more capable of truly transforming our energy landscape”.

Last month a group of celebrities with homes in the area or links to it,
including the actors Bill Nighy and David Morrissey and the painter Maggi
Hambling, called on the government to step in to delay consideration of the
proposal until the coronavirus restrictions were lifted. Mr Nighy, who used
to live in Theberton with his former partner, the actress Diana Quick,
said: “It is beyond belief that EDF is pressing forward during these
terrible and uncertain times with a project so misguided, and which even
the government’s own advisers find deeply concerning.

“If Sizewell C is allowed to go ahead we will be left with an outdated form of energy that
will not fit to any degree in our new world, and this internationally
famous environment will be desecrated. This is a time to protect our
ecosystems, not shatter them.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-poses-threat-to-rare-birds-says-national-trust-97vpn059f

May 27, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment, opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Move to prevent dumping of Hinkley radioactive mud on the South Wales coast

WANA, 18 May 2020 As Electricité de France once more plans to dredge contaminated mud from the Severn Estuary near Hinkley Point and dump it on the South Wales coast, the Welsh Anti Nuclear Alliance (WANA) is asking you to help stop them. Political and legal action is the only hope and it’s urgent because the Welsh Government is setting up an “Expert Group”.

The background shows that the Welsh Government believes concerns about the mud are irrational and are driven by “liars and scaremongers” (as the Environment Secretary said in 2018).

In fact, in order to comply with the law, they need to address uncertainties and knowledge gaps and that is why we are recommending selection of members with a wide range of relevant knowledge. Please write to your elected representatives and circulate this widely, bearing in mind that Wales is not the only part of the UK affected. What little information the Welsh Government has issued suggests that announcement of the Expert Group’s membership may be imminent, so please act now. They will not want to look as if they’re backing down later. https://wanaarticles418353382.wordpress.com/category/hinkley-mud/

May 19, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Campaigners condemn transport of nuclear weapons from AWE this week during lockdown

Campaigners condemn transport of nuclear weapons from AWE this week during lockdown

By Naomi Herring @, 15 May 20, ANTI-NUCLEAR campaigners have criticised the decision to transport nuclear warheads from the south of England to Scotland during the pandemic.A convoy carrying the weapons is understood to have left the Atomic Weapons Establishment site at Burghfield, Berkshire, on Wednesday morning and arrived at the storage facility at the Royal Naval Armaments Depot Coulport in Argyll and Bute that evening.

Nukewatch UK claims the convoy would have involved at least 50 personnel, including a crew change, and said it travelled along the M6 and on the M8 through Glasgow city centre……. https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/18452947.campaigners-condemn-transport-nuclear-weapons-awe-week-lockdown/

May 16, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

wide and growing coalition of real concern about EDF’s Sizewell C nuclear project

East Anglian Daily Times 9th May 2020. NFLA, Cllr David Blackburn Councillors are right, EDF should delay its Sizewell C application. I warmly welcome the joint letter of opposition
councillors on Sizewell County Council calling on the Government to halt
EDF moving forward with a Development Consultation Order for Sizewell C
(EADT, 28th April).

The letter mirrors our own concerns noted last week in
our own letter to the EADT, and that of many parish, town and East Suffolk
District Councillors as well. Democratic discussions have to be put on hold
at the moment as the country deals with the worst public health emergency
in living memory.

It suggests an arrogance and a desperation within EDF to
want to move forward with the Sizewell C development at the moment. The
four rounds of local consultation on EDF’s Sizewell C plans showed a large
level of concern and opposition from across local government, much of which
stating that EDF have not provided adequate information to explain how they
would mitigate many of the harmful environmental effects of the
development. Indeed, all local environmental groups have raised huge
concern on its impact, particularly to the likes of wildlife gems like the
RSPB Minsmere site.

Just today, 60 prominent local people have added
similar concerns in a joint letter to The Times. It is clear there is a
wide and growing coalition of real concern about Sizewell C. EDF should not
just halt the DCO application, it should listen to local opinion and cancel
the project altogether. There is no need for Sizewell C. It is time EDF
listened to its critics and halted it.

https://www.eadt.co.uk/home

May 11, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Archives
- April 2026 (126)
- 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
  - Arclight's Vision
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
  - business and costs
    - employment
    - marketing
  - climate change
  - culture and arts
  - ENERGY
    - renewable
      - decentralised
      - energy storage
  - environment
    - oceans
    - water
  - health
    - children
    - psychology – mental health
    - radiation
    - social effects
    - women
  - history
  - indigenous issues
  - Legal
    - deaths by radiation
    - legal
  - marketing of nuclear
  - media
    - investigative journalism
    - Wikileaks
  - opposition to nuclear
  - PERSONAL STORIES
  - politics
    - psychology and culture
      - Trump – personality
    - public opinion
    - USA election 2024
    - USA elections 2016
  - politics international
  - Religion and ethics
  - safety
    - incidents
  - secrets,lies and civil liberties
    - civil liberties
  - spinbuster
    - Education
  - technology
    - reprocessing
    - Small Modular Nuclear Reactors
    - space travel
  - Uranium
  - wastes
    - – plutonium
    - decommission reactor
  - weapons and war
    - Atrocities
    - depleted uranium
  - Women
- 2 WORLD
  - ANTARCTICA
  - ARCTIC
  - ASIA
    - Burma
    - China
    - India
    - Indonesia
    - Japan
    - Malaysia
    - Mongolia
    - North Korea
    - Pakistan
    - South Korea
    - Taiwan
    - Turkey
    - Vietnam
  - EUROPE
    - Belarus
    - Bulgaria
    - Denmark
    - Finland
    - France
    - Germany
    - Greece
    - Ireland
    - Italy
    - Kazakhstan
    - Kyrgyzstan
    - Russia
    - Spain
    - Sweden
    - Switzerland
    - UK
    - Ukraine
  - MIDDLE EAST
    - Afghanistan
    - Egypt
    - Gaza
    - Iran
    - Iraq
    - Israel
    - Jordan
    - Libya
    - Saudi Arabia
    - Syria
    - Turkey
    - United Arab Emirates
  - NORTH AMERICA
    - Canada
    - USA
      - election USA 2020
  - OCEANIA
    - New Zealand
    - Philippines
  - SOUTH AMERICA
    - Brazil
- ACTION
- AFRICA
  - Kenya
  - Malawi
  - Mali
  - Namibia
  - Niger
  - Nigeria
  - Somalia
  - South 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
  - thorium
- Reference
  - Reference archives
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

nuclear-news

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

Lithuania standing firm against sales of electricity from Belarus’ new nuclear power station

Coalition for Responsible Energy Development wants a stop to nuclear expansion in Canada

Anti-nuclear resistance in Russia: problems protests, reprisals

Anti-nuclear resistance in Russia: problems protests, reprisals

Nuclear energy: failures and Lies

Bradwell nuclear project “unsustainable, unsuitable and unacceptable” – and not a done deal

Anti–nuclear resistance in Russia: problems, protests, reprisals

Nuclear energy: failures and lies

Beyond Nuclear Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging High-Level Radioactive Waste Dump

Uranium mining protests in Russia

Resistance developing to EDF’s plan to store nuclear waste at Belleville-sur-Loire

Wildlife charities unite to oppose Sizewell C nuclear power station

Opposition to unnecessary, environmentally destructive Sizewell nuclear project

Opposition in Canada to nuclear waste dump on agricultural land

UK’s National Trust says new Sizewell C nuclear power station poses threat to rare birds

Move to prevent dumping of Hinkley radioactive mud on the South Wales coast

Campaigners condemn transport of nuclear weapons from AWE this week during lockdown

wide and growing coalition of real concern about EDF’s Sizewell C nuclear project

1 This Month

Categories

Pages

Archives

Categories

RSS

Site info