Anti-nuclear power plant activists turn to Turkey’s highest court , Ahval, Ezgi Karataş
Nov 17 2018
Turkish environmentalists are deeply concerned about the ongoing construction of the country’s first nuclear power plant and plan to bring their case to Turkey’s highest court.
In the past year, environmental groups have brought up many legal cases against the plant, which is being built in Akkuyu, near Mersin, on the Mediterranean coast. Scientists have argued that the plant will adversely impact the regional ecology and economy, undermining the livelihoods of people who rely on the marine ecosystem and tourism.
Last month, an appeals court upheld a local court’s decision to accept the Turkish government’s environmental impact assessment, even though several news reportssaid some scientists’ signatures on the report were forged.Following the appeals court’s decision, environmentalists say they plan to petition the Constitutional Court. Sevim Küçük, a lawyer and vocal member of the Mersin Anti-Nuclear Platform, believes Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan influenced the appeals court’s decision.
“The president issued instructions to speed up the work one day before the hearing at the appeals court,” she said. “The judiciary was pressured by the executive. As a result, we were not expecting a just decision.”
Küçük says their appeal to the Constitutional Court does not automatically indicate a motion to stay. Plant construction, which began in April 2018 with a ceremony attended by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Erdoğan via video conference, is expected to continue during the proceedings. “Lower courts did not issue a motion to stay either, so the construction was continuing during all our legal battles as well,” says Küçük.
Küçük says that government assessment is out of line with scientific evidence and based on falsified expert reports. She believes the report was copy-pasted from falsified expert reports, and that the court, in its decision, copy-pasted the same reports as well.
A key concern of the environmental group is the storage of nuclear waste, which the assessment does not adequately address. “While Europe, Japan, America are trying to close down their nuclear power plants, why is our government so determined to build one?” asks Küçük. “As locals we are worried that the plant will store its nuclear waste in our neighbourhoods.”
Dr. Ful Uğurhan, another member of the anti-nuclear group, says that
The location of Akkuyu is not suited to build a nuclear power plant, argues Ful Uğurhan, another member of the anti-nuclear group. Uğurhan says that the seawater temperatures in Akkuyu are high, which not only means spending more energy to cool down the reactors, but the process will further increase the seawater temperatures and upset the ecological balance.
An active geological fault line near Akkuyu means additional risk.
“Considering the effects of global climate change, it’s not safe to build a nuclear power plant anywhere,” says Uğurhan. “Storms, earthquakes, tsunamis all increase the risk involved in building a nuclear power plant, instead of ecologically safe electricity production plants.” ………https://ahvalnews.com/akkuyu/anti-nuclear-power-plant-activists-turn-turkeys-highest-court
A 39-year-old man expressed regret over the test during a visit with his baby to the Peace Memorial Park in the city of Hiroshima, which was hit by a US atomic bombing in 1945.
He said it’s regrettable that the United States conducted the test, which no one wanted, despite people’s hope for peace.
He said for the sake of children, he does not want nuclear weapons to exist in the future.
A 52-year-old woman in the city said the administration of President Donald Trump is not moving in the right direction, while provoking the world to divide.
She said she hopes the Japanese government will have its own views, without following the US administration.
Shigemitsu Tanaka, the head of the atomic bomb survivors’ organization in Nagasaki, also criticized the subcritical test.
He said it was a move against the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which was adopted last year, and the test is unforgivable.
He said he hopes the US will lead efforts to eliminate nuclear arms as the only country to have used nuclear weapons and will call on other nations to abolish them.
Utilities just voted to continue Vogtle reactor construction; residents want cleanup, By Jeremy Deaton, Nexus Media
You could be forgiven for taking a Geiger counter on a visit to Shell Bluff, Georgia. The town lies just across the Savannah River from a nuclear weapons facility and just down the road from an aging nuclear power plant. The river is one of the most toxic waterways in the country. The weapons facility is one of the most contaminated places on the planet, and the power plant is about to double in size.
Locals are outraged.
“We believe that Plant Vogtle is going to exacerbate the existing contamination that’s already in the area and make things worse,” said Lindsay Harper, deputy director of Georgia WAND, a women-led advocacy group working to end nuclear proliferation and pollution. “We believe that more money should be put toward cleaning up the contamination instead of continuing to produce more.”
Organizers from Georgia WAND and other advocacy groups gathered in Atlanta recently to discuss Plant Vogtle and related environmental issues and to register voters. The town hall marked the first stop on a bus tour organized by environmental leaders from across the South.
The Freedom to Breathe Tour will highlight environmental hazards facing marginalized communities — starting with the expansion to Plant Vogtle, the only nuclear project under construction in the country.
In 2009, Southern Company began building two reactors, which are expected to go online in 2021 and 2022, respectively. The expansion has stoked fears of contamination in what is already a heavily polluted area, leading advocates to call for more testing.
“We need independent monitoring in the area that can help us to paint a larger, broader picture of what’s actually going on,” Harper said.“We need more information. We need more money for information.”
CNN Report – Plant Vogtle
Both the power plant and the weapons facility across the river produce a radioactive form of hydrogen called tritium that has been tentatively linked to Down syndrome in infants. Monitoring has found “elevated levels” of tritium in the groundwater near Plant Vogtle — too little to threaten public health, officials say, but enough to raise eyebrows.
Locals are also worried that pollution from the plant may be causing cancer. Epidemiologist Joseph Mangano found evidence of an uptick in infant mortality and cancer deaths in Burke County, seat of Plant Vogtle, after the facility went online in 1987. It is unclear if the power plant was responsible for the increase.Research has shown that children exposed to radiation are more susceptible to cancer — leukemia, in particular — but it is unclear if nuclear power plants produce enough radiation to threaten public health.
Studies in Germany and France found that the rate of childhood leukemia was significantly higher near power plants, and a study in the United States found that nuclear plant closures were followed by a decline in childhood cancer.
However, similar studies, including one undertaken by the National Cancer Institute, found no evidence of a link. To settle the matter, the federal government undertook a multi-year study on nuclear power and cancer in 2010, but it prematurely halted that effort in early 2017.
Adding to the uncertainty, the federal government stopped paying for monitoring of contamination near Plant Vogtle in 2003, believing the power plant posed little risk. To allay public concerns about radiation, the government is funding an outreach effort to reassure residents that the facilities are harmless, but locals remain unconvinced. Advocates want more rigorous testing and continued research into the risks of exposure to even low levels of radioactive waste……….
Some, however, believe that nuclear is simply too costly and have called for more investment in batteries that can store power generated by solar and wind for when it’s needed.
This is the outcome that locals are hoping for. Many Burke County residents are employed by Plant Vogtle, but they would rather work in wind or solar. “People are having to choose between feeding their families and taking a job that may contaminate their body,” Harper said, referring both to the power plant and the weapons facility. “We want to put our money towards civilians and people, clean economies and clean, sustainable jobs.” https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2018/09/30/the-most-contaminated-corner-of-georgia/
I am always struck by the fact that opponents of the nuclear industry are very many unpaid people. Just people who care. Some are highly educated academically. Many are not – but then they take the trouble to find out, and speak with the authority of both their local knowledge and wider information.
As for nuclear proponents they’re a small number of paid individuals, with another small number of hangers-on who expect financial benefits from the nuclear industry.
ABC Radio Adelaide Evenings with Peter Goer. Talkback 4 Oct 18. This show was inundated with hundreds of South Australians phoning in and texting about the proposed nuclear waste dump. ALL SAID NO! Are you listening Department of Industry Innovation and Science and Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation !!!??…. IT’S A BIG NO FROM SOUTH AUSTRALIA!!!
Transcript:. Noel Wauchope . Not a perfect transcript, but a good account of what each caller said
Lots of text messages opposing the dump. Speakers:
Michelle thinks it’s a very risky dangerous thing to do. Many of the community don’t want it. S.A highly regarded for its produce. Transport of wastes is dangerous. It is a wedge. They tried to import nuclear wastes before and they’re trying again. Medical expert has advised that most medical wastes are very short-lived – no distant dump required.
Craig from CCSA says longterm solution is needed. Temporary storage at Lucas Heights a better idea than moving it to rural South Aust- avoid need for moving wastes twice – with “interim” storage in SA. Geological problem – movement of soil, active flood plain. Govt timetable is a political one. Our community being bribed.
James says the dump is a ludicrous idea. Only 3 landowners nominated their land. Money thrown in – distorts people’s thinking. It’s a foot in the door. Govt has already made up its mind.
Greg thinks it’s a ludicrous idea. Idea gone on for 40 years. Previous attempts ended up with legal action. Now legal action on. Need a suitable site – e.g. Commonwealth land – not disrupting a community like Kimba. Not to force it on to remote economically vulnerable community.
Katrina – wastes lasting many thousands of years, people are thinking it’s just gloves and gowns etc. Being rushed through. Need expert inquiry into safest waste solution. Instead, govt is selling it to communities – and they keep upping the money.
Betty says where do Americans store theirs? Agrees with previous callers. We are harnessing generations of children to maintaining these wastes. USA stores wastes in inaccessible mountains highly guarded [Ed. actually not correct]
Peter agrees with the previous speakers. What is this waste to be used for in the future – bombs?
Fay not happy -what are we leaving for the next generation? Last S.A. govt Jay Weatherill international dump in favour but it was knocked back .
Joanne was on Citizens Jury into nuclear waste dump – over 70 % said NO. There was the huge document – Royal Commission – why is govt not using this document? It is full of lies. USA govt has not found a way to dispose of its wastes. Lucas Heights is now receiving back high level nuclear wastes.
Julie the indigenous communities of Kimba and Hawker treated absolutely disgracefully in this process.
Paul says it is going to be low level nuclear waste. Why can’t it travel by air (Compere – we haven’t been told this)
Mary quoted Albert Einstein – “We are drifting towards a catastrophe beyond comparison…..”.
Sandra says 12 yrs ago she was in a caravan North of Tennant Creek – hit by an earthquake. Epicentre was 40km beyond Tennant Creek just where nuclear waste dump had been considered,X-rays done there for that purpose.
Brett – we’ve been told a layer cake of lies. People finding that more and more deception is going on. One of the biggest is that it’s medical waste. ANSTO and DIIS stopped telling that lie 3 months ago. Lots of bribery and deception going on. Bureaucrats gone crazy. It’s high level wastes in big containers- guarded by troops in UK.
Bob -this whole thing is one great big lie. During Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, a large part of their final report was about so-called low level nuclear wastes dump in Australia, We’re told that we shouldn’t conflate the national dump with an international dump. BUT in a Submission from Richard Yeeles formerly PR for Roxby Downs, he said Drop all this talk about an international facility . Let’s concentrate on getting a national dump here first and then we’ll go to the international dump afterwards. Richard Yeeles is now chief adviser to the Premier Steven Marshall. Everyone is hanging out for this vote.People in this State need to understand clearly that the Federal government can override the current legislation in our State. So it’s a national issue about a national dump.
Sylvia. Wants to know why S Aust should have the dump. NSW has just as much land, a bigger State..What’s wrong with their ground?
Peter Woolford It has divided our community. I put this to Minister Canavan. Both Kimba and Hawker have been impacted greatly. The govt has clearly forgotten this. A lot of money being thrown around. Take the money away – there’s no debate.People are focused on that money. The govt has tripled the money that’s going towards the facility – they’re upping the ante. Minister Canavan it’s up to his discretion where this goes. People need to understand that the Federal govt can override the legislation of this State It should b wider than KImba or Hawker it’s a National matter.
Patrick we can find out from Wikileaks.
Tim is concerned with the way people are thinking. It’s a political issue. We have been making money from selling uranium around the world, we need to take some responsibility. I wish we’d never started it.
Not one call, apart from Tim, from a pro nuclear person. No calls were screened out. Here we have heard from some of the many unpaid anti-nukers. Next week, Peter Goers might interview a couple of paid pro nukers ?
Anti-nuclear waste tour to come through Midland, Meetings push to block a proposal to transport used nuclear fuel by train and store it in West Texas, MRT, by Matt Zdun, Texas Tribune , September 26, 2018 Organizers of the “Protect Texas from Radioactive Waste Tour” plan to travel to five Texas cities over the next week in protest of a proposed plan to store used nuclear materials in West Texas.Several Texas organizations gathered in Houston on Tuesday to kick off their “Protect Texas from Radioactive Waste Tour,” the beginning of a renewed push to block a proposal to transport used nuclear fuel by train through Texas and store it in West Texas.
The tour’s organizers said they want to make people aware of the “high risk” implications of a proposal to build and operate a facility for 40,000 metric tons of irradiated fuel rods at an existing site in Andrews County.
If approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the project by Interim Storage Partners, a joint venture between Waste Control Specialists and Orano USA, would transport nuclear waste from around the country to the consolidated site in Texas and store it until a long-term storage site becomes available, according to the venture’s website.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in an August letter it would begin reviewing Interim Storage Partners’ license application and that its safety, security and environmental reviews of the proposal could conclude as early as August 2020.
Karen Hadden, the executive director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition, told The Texas Tribune that announcement triggered renewed opposition to the project and is one of the reasons for the tour.
The organizations involved — the Coalition of Community Organizations, Nuclear Information and Resource Services, Beyond Nuclear, the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition and Public Citizen — held a news conference by a railroad crossing in Houston, said Tom Smith, the special projects director of consumer rights advocacy group Public Citizen. Smith, who helped organize the tour, said in an interview with the Tribune that the news conference featured a 16-foot railroad container meant to replicate the transport cask that Interim Storage Partners would use to transport used nuclear fuel.
“We’re by the railroad tracks because we’re emphasizing that Texas businesses, hospitals and schools by the railroads are at high risk,” Hadden said. “It’s a bad idea to bring [nuclear waste] from around the country into Texas.”
The organizations instead want the used nuclear material to be kept at reactor sites in sturdier containers until a permanent storage site becomes available.
Smith said the proposed project presents a number of risks. A railroad accident would be disastrous, he said, because it could expose the public to harmful radiation and could cost municipalities hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up.
He also said nuclear waste on railcars running through densely populated areas like Houston, Dallas and San Antonio is at “high risk of terrorist sabotage.”…….
Smith said that after the news conference, the organizations planned to ask the Houston City Council to adopt a resolution against the proposed transportation of the nuclear material. He added that commissioners in San Antonio and Midland have already adopted similar resolutions.
The National 23rd Sept 2018 ,SUNSHINE and a rainbow reflected the positive vibes at the Nae Nukes
Anywhere’ peaceful protest march from the peace camp in Faslane
yesterday, led by Scottish makar Jackie Kay. More 600 people from around
the world and of all ages gathered at Trident’s military base at the
gates of HMNB Clyde to urge governments around the world to ban nuclear
weapons. http://www.thenational.scot/news/16897005.more-than-600-anti-nuclear-campaigners-stage-peace-walk-at-faslane/
Activists rally against nuclear waste transport, By JOSHUA SOLOMON Staff Writer,Greenfield Recorder September 21, 2018 GREENFIELD— In a lot of ways it was like a party, celebrating the accomplishments of the past few years: The closures of the Vermont and Rowe nuclear plants. ……..The theme of the night? The high-level nuclear power plant waste being stored in Rowe and Vernon, Vt., must go — but only once the right and final safe place for it is decided.
“I haven’t bothered you for three or four years at this point,” leader of CAN and Rowe resident Deb Katz said. “But we’ve come back to our community to say: We need to be involved again. And I wish it wasn’t so.”
Katz and CAN just begun a tour of New England, and after spending their first two nights in Vermont, they came to Greenfield Thursday. On Friday, they will take the tour to the Statehouse on Beacon Hill.
Currently, the anti-nuclear activists are rallying against a bill that could allow for the high-level nuclear waste in Rowe and Vernon, Vt., to be shipped in canisters across the country to Texas or New Mexico. It would place the waste in what CAN is calling “parking lots” that are seen as more temporary holdings than anything else, but could be pitched as helping tthe economy in these regions in the Southwest of the country.
“Why shouldn’t we just say ‘yes, wow. Thank you so much’? The trouble is this is a really bad idea,” Katz said. “We all want the waste off the site, but we want it done right. And we want it done once.” ………
At the moment there isn’t a distinct solution on where to move the high-level nuclear waste, but Katz and fellow lead organizer Chris Williams of Vermont advovated for more science to figure out the best solution to storing waste that remains toxic for thousands of years.
“It took a lot of hard science to create this mess,” Williams said. “To get rid of this stuff properly, we’re going to have to apply real science and not just political expediency.”
The goal is to look to scientists to find the place for “deep geological storage,” Williams said.
Preaching to find a better, scientific solution was organizer and activist Kerstin Rudek from the Peoples Initiative, based out of Germany, where her neighbors have faced similar issues.
“It’s an international thing,” Rudek said, pointing to the lack of answers of what to do with the nuclear waste and the need for answers. “It’s not just a local thing.”
The meeting, which Williams described as a “little more lively than your usual nuclear waste meeting,” also included the speaker Leona Morgan, from the Navajo Nation and an Albuquerque, N.M. resident.
“It’s great news when we hear a nuclear power plant has been shut down, but it makes me nervous because it makes the push for these false solutions even harder,” Morgan said.
She described the political climate in New Mexico as pitching to residents that moving the nuclear waste there would be good for their economy, creating jobs, but ignoring the will of the residents who might be affected by it most.
“I’m here tonight to tell you we don’t want it,” Morgan said. “We don’t want this waste.”………
Anti-nuclear waste rally in Montpelier, 18 Sept 18 MONTPELIER, Vt. (WCAX) An anti-nuclear waste campaign visited Montpelier Tuesday night, delivering a replica radioactive waste cask. The event was organized by the “Citizens Awareness Network” as part of a multi-stop tour throughout New England.
Activists say they are responding to a bill now in the U.S. Senate that would establish Anti-nuclear waste rally in Montpelier, 18 Sept 18 MONTPELIER, Vt. (WCAX) An anti-nuclear waste campaign visited Montpelier Tuesday night, delivering a replica radioactive waste cask. The event was organized by the “Citizens Awareness Network” as part of a multi-stop tour throughout New England.
Activists say they are responding to a bill now in the U.S. Senate that would establish temporary mobile storage for high-level nuclear waste. The storage casks would travel from places like the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant and would be transported to southwestern states like Texas and New Mexico. The group’s goal is to leave the waste where it is, but better protected.
“We have to find a responsible way to deal with this waste and what the industry is trying to do is just get this waste off of their hands as quickly as possible,” said Tim Judson of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.
“In New Mexico, we are concerned about not just our communities because of the storage, but the transport would impact everyone across the nation. Anywhere between a nuclear power plant and the waste site,” said Leona Morgan of the Nuclear Issues Study Group.
The nuclear cask will stop Wednesday night in Brattleboro at the Congregational Church.
. The storage casks would travel from places like the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant and would be transported to southwestern states like Texas and New Mexico. The group’s goal is to leave the waste where it is, but better protected.
“We have to find a responsible way to deal with this waste and what the industry is trying to do is just get this waste off of their hands as quickly as possible,” said Tim Judson of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.
“In New Mexico, we are concerned about not just our communities because of the storage, but the transport would impact everyone across the nation. Anywhere between a nuclear power plant and the waste site,” said Leona Morgan of the Nuclear Issues Study Group.
The nuclear cask will stop Wednesday night in Brattleboro at the Congregational Church.
Press Trust of India | New Delhi September 18, 2018 Activists and villagers raised their concerns over a proposed nuclear power plant in Chutka in Madhya Pradesh on Tuesday, saying it would destroy nature and take away their homeland.
In 2009, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL) has decided to set up the atomic station in Mandla district of Madhya Pradesh to generate 1,400 MW power.
Madhya Pradesh Power Generating Company Limited (MPPGCL) is the nodal agency to facilitate the execution of the project.
The villagers claimed they have been protesting for the past nine years over the atomic power plant and when they did not relent, compensation was put into their accounts forcefully. “MPPGCL forcefully put the compensation amount in our bank accounts and took our Aadhaar copies from the bank. We have written to the bank to remove their money,” said Meera Bai, a resident of Chutka.
Another resident, Dadu Lal Kudape, said they visited other villages where nuclear plants would be coming up and they found contaminated water and polluted environment.
“We do not want the same things to happen to us,” he said.
Padmini Ghosh, Women’s Regional Network India Coordinator, said if European countries are dismantling nuclear power plants, India is building them. “We need to review nuclear policy and install renewable energy plants,” Ghosh said.
Raj Kumar Sinha, activist working with the villagers, said they are being exploited and no amount of money could compensate for their land.
“These people are nature lovers. They can’t be bought with money,” he said.
The Women’s Regional Network said a total of 17,000 people would be displaced if the plant comes up.
Nationally this effort is bringing together social, environmental and economic justice communities recognizing that their concerns are all connected and that there is no greater insult, impact or effect to each of these than nuclear war, by Robert Dodge
A national collaborative grassroots coalition to abolish nuclear weapons is rapidly emerging in this country. The effort called “Back from the Brink: A Call to Prevent Nuclear War” started last fall after the U.N. Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was adopted by 122 nations with the U.S. and other nuclear nations boycotting. The campaign endorses the Treaty and important protective policies such as ending the President’s sole, unchecked authority to launch a nuclear attack, renouncing the option of using nuclear weapons first, taking U.S. nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert, and canceling U.S. plans to replace its entire nuclear arsenal with enhanced weapons. This Call was crafted by dozens of organizations including Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Soka Gakkai International.
Nationally this effort is bringing together social, environmental and economic justice communities recognizing that their concerns are all connected and that there is no greater insult, impact or effect to each of these than nuclear war. Our families, children and communities have a right to exist in a world free of this threat.
The driving force for this movement has been the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons and the recognition that there is no meaningful medical or humanitarian response to nuclear war. It is fitting that in August, 73 years after the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9th, 1945 respectively that significant progress was made in the U.S toward the elimination of these weapons.
Following the U.S. Council of Mayors’ unanimous adoption of the Resolution at their annual June meeting in Boston where it was sponsored by Mayor Franklin Cownie of Des Moines, Iowa, the Los Angeles and Baltimore City Councils unanimously adopted the Resolution on August 8 and 6th respectively. Eleven other cities around the nation as well as over 150 faith organizations, NGOs, and thousands of individuals have done so as well.
Taking the national lead, the California Legislature passed Assemblywoman Monique Limón’s AJR 33 in the State Assembly on August 20th and Senate on August 28th. This measure from the nation’s largest state and 6th largest global economy, urges our federal leaders and our nation to embrace the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, to make nuclear disarmament the centerpiece of our national security policy, and to spearhead a global effort to prevent nuclear war. The Call itself empowers everyone from individual citizens to organizations, communities and states to take action in the international movement to abolish nuclear weapons.
The rest of the world is speaking out for nuclear disarmament as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is being ratified. Once ratified by 50 nation states, it will ban nuclear weapons, just as every other weapon of mass destruction including chemical and biological weapons have been banned. Open for signature since last September, presently there are 60 nations that have signed the Treaty and 14 nations who have ratified it, the latest being New Zealand who ratified in July.
We the people of the U.S. must join this international effort. As the only nuclear nation to have used these immoral weapons and one who maintains ~45% of the 14,400 global weapons, we have a moral and legal responsibility as a signatory of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to work for the complete abolition of these weapons.
Nuclear war must never be fought and cannot be won. The only way to prevent this is by the complete abolition of these weapons. The existence of these weapons and the threat they pose is a threat that does not have to be. This is a threat invented by man and is a threat that man can eliminate. It is not a threat that will magically go away or that “they” will take care of. It is a threat that we the people must demand be eliminated. In a functional democracy, it is imperative that all citizens make their voices heard.
Reporterre 1st Sept 2018 [Machine Translation] Since the morning of Saturday, September 1, several anti-nuclear Franco-German militants block a uranium transport.
They climbed a bridge 140 m high near Koblenz, Germany, blocking the railway on the Moselle, informs us the group Contratom Deutschland. The blocked train carries ” Yellow Cake ” from Namibia ; it left Hamburg on Thursday for the Orano uranium conversion plant in Narbonne Malvesi, in the south of France.
In Narbonne, uranium is transformed into UF4 and then used, after several transformations and enrichment, in nuclear power plants around the world. According to Orano, the Narbonne plant processes 25% of the world’s uranium.
“If we want to get out of the nuclear industry, ” says Cécile, a French climber living in Germany who takes part in the action, ” we must stop these transports and prevent them from reaching the Orano factory in
Narbonne Malvési, the gateway to European nuclear energy.
Germany, a net exporter of electricity, unlike political discourse, does not come out quite nuclear. The transports supplying the nuclear facilities continue and the Framatome Nuclear Fuel Plant in Lingen (Lower Saxony) and Urenco’s uranium enrichment plant in Gronau (North Westphalia) continue to operate. That’s why we want to stop nuclear transport. ”
The ever-evolving situation at the San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station and its nuclear waste problem has become a hot-button issue for residents of San Clemente, Oceanside, and beyond. It’s immensely complex, but allow me, if you will, to oversimplify.
Spent nuclear fuel goes through a years-long cooling process in pools before it can be moved to dry storage where it further cools until it is safe for transport to long-term storage. “Long-term” storage facility, though, is a misnomer. It’s essentially the permanent resting place for nuclear waste stored in extremely thick metal canisters. The problem at San Onofre and many decommissioned nuclear generation stations across the country, though, is there is no long-term storage facility. Or rather, one was planned for an area called Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but in 2011 the Feds pulled the plug. As a result, short-term solutions have become defacto long-term solutions, which is where we are today at San Onofre.
Back in February, Southern California Edison and contractors involved in the SONGS decommissioning process began transferring spent nuclear fuel from pools to dry storage – or dry cask storage. Tens of thick metal canisters of spent nuclear fuel have since been stored on site adjacent to the generators beneath a concrete pad called the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).
When I toured the facility back in May (more on that later), SoCal Edison employees were adamant that public safety was of the utmost importance, and that these thick metal casks were not “buried in the sand” but rather safely stored in concrete for the interim. Employees also emphasized that Southern California Edison’s goal is to move the spent fuel as expeditiously and safely as possible. “Don’t forget, our families go in the ocean nearby, too,” many said.
But Congressional gridlock and an inability to designate a feasible long-term storage site means what was once thought to be a safer short-term solution (dry storage is passive and doesn’t require energy to cool as in cooling pools) may need re-thinking.
That’s why a group of activists, called the Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles recently launched a letter-writing campaign urging the California State Lands Commission to authorize the local transfer of spent nuclear fuel to an area further east in Camp Pendleton.
“3.6 million pounds of highly radioactive nuclear waste at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station near San Diego is currently in the process of being buried on the beach, just 100 feet from the ocean and a mere few feet above the water table,” their website reads. “Send in a comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and demand a better solution: the nuclear waste should be moved off the beach to a new, above-ground concrete-reinforced temporary storage facility located further east in Camp Pendleton—where it can be protected from sea level rise and potential terrorist attack.”
A sub-group of PSRLA called the Committee to Bridge the Gap has created a petition page, urging concerned citizens to put their name on a letter voicing their discontent.
According to their website, the group claims this revised plan has garnered the support of former Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chief Greg Jaczko, U.S. government advisor on nuclear waste Tom English, and retired Navy Admiral Len Herring.
The campaign explains that the failure to even consider the idea of moving the fuel east of the primary ISFSI site is a serious oversight on the part of those involved in the decommissioning process.
The letter PSRLA is urging residents to sign implores the State Lands Commission to step in. “As public servants and members of the CSLC you have a moral duty to protect our safety. Please do not take that responsibility lightly,” it says.
Traditional owners won’t give up 40-year opposition to Yeelirrie uranium mine, By Linda Pentz Gunter
In the local Aboriginal language, the name Yeelirrie means to weep or mourn. It is referred to as a “place of death.” Yeelirrie is on Tjiwarl Native Title lands in Western Australia, where it has long been faithfully protected by Aboriginal traditional owners. The Seven Sisters Dreaming songline is there. It is home to many important cultural sites. And for 40 years, due to resolute indigenous opposition, and thousands of community submissions of protest, it had been spared plans by the Canadian mining company, Cameco, to plunder it for uranium.
The earth guardians know that such a desecration would cause the extinction of multiple species of subterranean fauna. It would release death. It would destroy Yeelirrie.
Now the fate of those tiny creatures hangs in the balance, their future in the hands of three brave women, backed by environmental organizations, after the outgoing Western Australian government decided to allow the Yeelirrie uranium mine project to go forward.
That decision was made in January 2017, despite the fact that, in August 2016, the Western Australia Environmental Protection Agency (WAEPA) had recommended that the Yeelirrie project be rejected.
The Conservation Council of Western Australia (CCWA), which is engaged in contesting the uranium mining permit for Yeelirrie, said the WAEPA had rejected the Yeelirrie mine plan “on the grounds that the project is inconsistent with three of the objectives of the Environmental Protection Act — the Precautionary Principle, the Principle of conservation of biological diversity, and the Principle of intergenerational equity. The EPA decision was based on the overwhelming evidence that the project would make several species of subterranean fauna extinct.”
But former Minister for Environment, Albert Jacob, threw all that aside to approve the Yeelirrie mine in the waning days of Western Australia’s Liberal government, now replaced by Labor, which came in on a mandate to end uranium mining that it now may not be able to enforce.
In February 2018, CCWA and three members of the Tjiwarl community initiated proceedings in the Western Australia Supreme Court in an attempt to invalidate the approval decision made by Jacob. The case was dismissed by the court, a decision said CCWA executive director, Piers Verstegen, that shows that “our environmental laws are deeply inadequate,” and “confines species to extinction with the stroke of a pen.”
However, while the decision was a set-back, Verstegen said, “it’s absolutely not the end of the road for Yeelirrie or the other uranium mines that are being strongly contested here in Western Australia.”
Accordingly, CCWA and the three Tjiwarl women — Shirley Wonyabong, Elizabeth Wonyabong, and Vicky Abdullah (pictured left to right above the headline) vow to fight on, and have begun proceedings in the WA Court of Appeal to review the Supreme Court decision.
“I grew up here, my ancestors were Traditional Owners of country, and I don’t want a toxic legacy here for my grandchildren,” Abdullah told Western Australia Today in an August 2017 article.
“We have no choice but to defend our country, our culture, and the environment from the threat of uranium mining — not just for us but for everyone.”
Yeelirrie is one of four uranium mines proposed for Western Australia. The other three are Vimy’s Mulga Rock project, Toro Energy’s Wiluna project, and Cameco’s and Mitsubishi’s Kintyre project. Each of them is home to precious species, but Yeelirrie got special attention from the WAEPA because the proposed mine there would cause actual extinctions of 11 species, mostly tiny underground creatures that few people ever see.
According to a new animated short film, produced by the Western Australia Nuclear-Free Alliance, all four of these proposed mines could irreparably damage wildlife, habitat and the health of the landscape and the people and animals who depend on it. The film highlights Yeelirrie, but also describes the other three proposed uranium mines and the threats they pose.
At Mulga Rock, in the Queen Victoria Desert, the site is home to the Sandhill Dunnart, the Marsupial Mole, the Mulgara and the Rainbow Bee Eater, according to the film.
Wiluna, a unique desert lake system, could see uranium mining across two salt lakes that would leave 50 million tonnes of radioactive mine waste on the shores of Lake Way, which is prone to flooding.
The Kintyre uranium deposit was excluded from the protection of the Karlamilyi National Park within which it sits so that uranium could be mined there. It is a fragile desert ecosystem where 28 threatened species would be put at risk, including the Northern Quoll, Greater Bilby, Crest Tailed Mulgara, Marsupial Mole and Rock Wallaby.
At Yeelirrie, says the CCWA, “Cameco plans to construct a 9km open mine pit and uranium processing plant. The project would destroy 2,421 hectares of native vegetation and generate 36 million tonnes of radioactive mine waste to be stored in open pits.”
The mine would likely operate for 22 years and use 8.7 million litres of water a day.
Under Australian laws, ‘nuclear actions’ like the Yeelirrie proposal also require approval by the Federal Environment Minister. CCWA and Nuclear-Free Western Australia, have launched a campaign directed at Federal Environment Minister, Josh Frydenberg, calling for a halt to the Yeelirrie mine, given the immense risk it poses to “unique subterranean fauna that have been found nowhere else on the planet.” They point out that the Minister has the opportunity to “protect these unique species from becoming extinct.
“Species have a right to life no matter how great or small,” they wrote. “One extinction can massively disrupt an entire ecosystem. No one should have the right to knowingly eliminate an entire species from our planet forever.”
Hundreds protest against nuclear power station mud dump, BBC News 27 August 2018
Hundreds of campaigners have gathered outside the Senedd over plans to move mud dredged from alongside a new nuclear power plant to near Cardiff.
Developers want to dump 300,000 tonnes of mud off Cardiff Bay from Somerset’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power site.
Protesters want more tests before the move can happen and the licence granted by Natural Resources Wales revoked……….campaigners claim it could be contaminated by discharges from the old Hinkley Point A and B and argue the mud has not been adequately tested……..
Labour AM Mike Hedges said the mud samples and data should be made available to “external” experts while David Melding, a Conservative, said he was “satisfied that [the samples] do meet the standards as set by international law”. ….https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-45322712
As reported by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Nevada’s Republican governor, Brian Sandoval, his State Agency for Nuclear Project’s executive director, Robert Halstead, and other Silver State officials, have recommitted to yet another round of resistance in 2019 to the high-level radioactive waste dump targeted at them since the enactment of the “Screw Nevada bill” of 1987.
Ian Zabarte Principal Man of the Western Bands of Shoshone Indians, and secretary of the Native Community Action Council (NCAC), has achieved hard won legal standing, in opposition to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s licensing of the Yucca dump, in the biggest proceeding in the agency’s history. (NCAC has also been appointed to the NRC’s Yucca Licensing Support Network Advisory Review Panel.) The 1863 “peace and friendship” Treaty of Ruby Valley, signed by the U.S. government with the Western Shoshone, is clear evidence that the U.S. Department of Energy lacks title to the land and water at the site, so cannot legally proceed with construction and operation of the $100 billion+ dump.
nuclear-news 