nuclear-news

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

22 April Paris Agreement signing ceremony at United Nations, New York

logo Paris climate1The Paris Agreement signing ceremony at a glance https://theconversation.com/the-paris-agreement-signing-ceremony-at-a-glance-58221 [good charts etc]  April 22, 2016 Leaders and diplomats from more than 160 countries are gathering at the United Nations’ New York headquarters on April 22 to sign the Paris Agreement – the landmark climate deal hammered out at the culmination of last year’s talks.

The ceremony marks the start of a year-long opportunity for countries to sign the agreement, although most of the world will sign on the opening day. But the process doesn’t end there – nations will still need to ratify the treaty domestically. Only when at least 55 countries, accounting for at least 55% of global greenhouse emissions, have done so will the Paris deal become international law.

April 22, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Pakistan’s nukes at risk of theft by ISIS?

Islamic State could steal Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and make ‘dirty bomb’, defence analysts warn, ABC News, By freelance correspondent Ashraf Ali in Islamabad , 21 Apr 16, The mounting concern of an Islamic State presence in Pakistan has put the spotlight on the security of the country’s nuclear arsenal.

Key points:

  • Some security experts fear country’s nuclear arsenal at risk from IS operatives
  • Others disagree, pointing to security around weapons
  • Pakistan’s nuclear technology previously leaked to Iran, Libya and North Korea

In February, the director-general of Pakistan’s intelligence bureau, Aftab Sultan, said hundreds of fighters from his country were joining IS in Syria, generating concerns about their links and activities when they returned home.

He also said an undisclosed network in Pakistan had been broken up.

More recently, US President Barack Obama declared at a nuclear summit in Washington: “The threat from terrorists trying to launch a nuclear attack is real. It would change the world.”

The warnings have triggered debate in Pakistan about the possibility of a “dirty” nuclear bomb……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-20/growing-concerns-is-could-steal-nuclear-weapons/7342722

April 22, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Anti-nuclear environmentalists not at all the same as climate denialists

Flag-USAWhy anti-nuclear enviros just aren’t the same as climate deniers http://grist.org/politics/why-anti-nuclear-enviros-just-arent-the-same-as-climate-deniers/ By  on Apr 20, 2016 Pundits looking to burnish their independent credentials are fond of claiming that liberals have their own biases as impervious to evidence as climate-science denial. The examples they cite are always bogus, though.

The latest such argument comes from Eduardo Porter, economics columnist at The New York Times. Porter asserted on Tuesday that liberals are standing in the way of combatting climate change. Not only that, he declared that they are doing it because they don’t accept science.

“Even as progressive environmentalists wring their hands at the G.O.P.’s climate change denial, there are biases on the left that stray just as far from the scientific consensus,” Porter wrote. ”For starters, they stand against the only technology with an established track record of generating electricity at scale while emitting virtually no greenhouse gases: nuclear power.”

Even if we were to concede Porter’s questionable premise that liberals oppose nuclear power, their opposition is not a rejection of “the scientific consensus.” There is no scientific consensus in favor of nukes. It’s not even a scientific question.

Porter tried to justify his contention with the following: “Only 35 percent of Democrats, compared with 60 percent of Republicans, favor building more nuclear power plants, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center. It is the G.O.P. that is closer to the scientific consensus. According to a separate Pew poll of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 65 percent of scientists want more nuclear power too.”

Set aside the fact that 65 percent is not a consensus, and you still have the problem that Porter misuses the word scientific. The policy preferences of scientists are not scientific, even if 100 percent share them. As with all voters, scientists form their political judgements based on a complex web of priorities, values, and knowledge or ignorance of empirical facts. Whether we should use more nuclear power is a political, not a scientific, question. The same Pew poll Porter cites found that most scientists oppose offshore oil drilling, but that is no more a “scientific consensus” than the views of AAAS members on the minimum wage or Social Security.

The scientific consensus on climate change is clear. Of the 24,000 peer-reviewed scientific articles on climate change published in 2013 and 2014, fully 99.99 percent found that the Earth is warming and greenhouse gas emissions are largely responsible. That, unlike a 65 percent majority, is an actual consensus. Even if all scientists wanted more nuclear power plants, it wouldn’t be a scientific consensus, just the policy preference measured by an opinion poll of people who happen to be scientists.

Every candidate for the Republican presidential nomination denies the scientific findings on climate change, as do all but a handful of Republicans in Congress. According to a Pew poll from last year, “71% of Democrats and independents who lean to the Democratic Party say the Earth is warming due to human activity, compared with 27% among their Republican counterparts.” This is what rejection of a scientific consensus looks like.

The question of whether we build more nuclear reactors has environmental, public health and safety, economic, and even moral dimensions. Voters must balance the low greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear against the environmental damage of uranium mining, the threat of nuclear meltdown or terrorist attack on a reactor, and the problem of storing spent fuel rods. In light of all that, most liberals, like 35 percent of scientists, lean against building new nukes.

This is partly because many liberals view the nuclear energy industry as dependent on corporate welfare. Our energy utilities are corporations, not government entities. They generally haven’t been building nuclear power plants for the last few decades because they’re extremely expensive, almost five times as costly upfront as a gas-fired power plant, and frequently suffer from cost overruns. And they already get plenty of help from the government. Nuclear plants depend on federal loan guarantees to support their construction, and enjoy subsidies that help cover the costs of mining uranium, providing plant security, free access to cooling water, and waste disposal. They also, given the history of reactor meltdowns, would be too expensive to insure without the Price-Anderson Act, which limits liability for a nuclear accident. (The cost of nuclear energy, like its other downsides, is not mentioned in Porter’s column.)

The real question, then, is whether we should heap more subsidies on the nuclear industry to lower the cost. Most liberals think that any subsidies would be better spent on safer and cheaper renewable energy. Porter can disagree, but his view does not entitle him to smear liberals as anti-science.

Oddly enough, Porter neglected to mention the public policy that truly does impede nuclear power: subsidies for fossil fuels. By not taxing carbon emissions, we allow gas and coal-fired power plants to stick us all with the bill for climate change. It’s a subsidy that makes fossil fuels artificially cheap. A stiff carbon tax would make nuclear power more competitive with fossil fuels.

The only presidential candidate who backs a carbon tax is the same one who Porter lambasted for opposing new nuclear power: Bernie Sanders. “Ted Cruz’s argument that climate change is a hoax to justify a government takeover of the world is absurd,” Porter wrote. “But Bernie Sanders’s argument that ‘toxic waste byproducts of nuclear plants are not worth the risks of the technology’s benefit’ might also be damaging.”

Many mainstream environmental experts think that Sanders’s proposal to deny all relicensing applications for nuclear reactors is too broad and may increase carbon emissions in the short-term. But that doesn’t make it the same type of problem as Cruz and Donald Trump’s denial that climate change even exists. Conservatives deny reality — making debate over policy solutions impossible — while Sanders reaches a counterproductive conclusion on one specific issue.

Whatever the merits of Porter’s affection for nuclear power, it’s simply wrong to accuse anyone who doesn’t share his view of denying an objective scientific consensus. Dishonest hippie punching may entice readers to click but it leaves them less informed.

April 22, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) backs action on Climate Change

From UNICEF

UNICEF copyUNICEF’s increasing involvement in climate change. Other UN groups have worked on this for decades, but the connection with children is a new approach.

Thanks to all the excellent work by Country Offices, #ClimateChain has gathered hundreds of powerful images of children standing boldly in front of the environment they want to protect.  #ClimateChain was launched on World Water Day; that week, UNICEF received 236 million potential impressions on social media.

We now leverage this effort for this week’s historic signing of the Paris Climate Agreement at the UN.  On Friday, 22 April, world leaders are to convene at the General Assembly Hall to sign the environmental accord – a record 197 countries pledging their commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and start adapting for the effects of climate change.

UNICEF is working to make sure children are front and center of this occasion.

As the leaders gather, they will be greeted by children forming a live Climate Chain, with screens showing images of children around the world forming the Climate Chain. 

Getrude Clement, a UNICEF Digital Youth Mapper, will speak during the opening ceremony, sharing her experience in Tanzania and urging the leaders to uphold their commitments.

After the final speaker, 197 children will flood the aisles of the GA Hall in a key moment to make a powerful statement about climate action.  Wearing T-shirts which say “your promise, our future,” the children will reach their arms out in a Climate Chain, as images of children from around the world in a virtual chain are also shown on screens.

We invite you to post your photos and join the Climate Chain this week, before Friday.

 

 

April 20, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Nuclear war may be inevitable

The Inevitability of Nuclear War?

Nuclear war, absent an immediate, fundamental, worldwide change in attitude, could be weeks, months or years away.

MOYERS AND COMPANY, BY WINSLOW MYERS | APRIL 19, 2016 Nuclear war is coming. Our officials are currently increasing the chances of that.

I only write ominous op-ed pieces like this in the spirit of hoping I’m an inaccurate prophet. But I’m unable to avoid the difficult conclusion that nuclear war, absent an immediate, fundamental, worldwide change in attitude, is an inevitable part of our future. It could be weeks, months or years away. But it is coming. It could break out at any moment between India and Pakistan, the most likely scenario at present. Pakistan is deploying tactical nuclear weapons controlled by local commanders on the front lines in Kashmir, as if the near-miss of the Cuban crisis of 1962 had never happened. War could almost as likely start between NATO and Russia. It might begin with an accident, a misinterpretation of computer blips, a terrorist act, a careless or calculated overreach by a dictator or a troubled officer with access to sequestered codes. There are too many weapons of too many sizes connected by too many complex but imperfect electronic systems to too many fallible human beings.

If it happens, all our incremental steps toward a semblance of world order will disappear in a few minutes of unimaginable destruction, to be replaced by a barbaric chaos where medical facilities are overwhelmed and water and food supplies are contaminated. Those still alive at the periphery of the blasts will envy those annihilated at the center.

The effects will be experienced around the world, even from a so-called “regional” war. As the ash and soot and radioactive particles from the detonations rise into the upper atmosphere and disperse upon the winds, we will learn just how small a planet we inhabit together — a lethal lesson with no do-over……..

We have been gifted with the capacity to see. Instead, we are very close to doing ourselves in. We ignore the life-affirming realism of Jesus, Gandhi, the Dalai Lama and Martin Luther King Jr. in favor of the illusory “realism” of Kissinger, Cheney, Trump and Cruz. Millions on the planet continue to work their hearts out to wake people up to reasonable alternatives based in common interest and common sense.

May they prove my pessimism wrong. http://billmoyers.com/story/the-inevitability-of-nuclear-war/

April 20, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

The extinction crisis in a warming world – video

 How climate change is intensifying threats to nature — and what can be done …

The world is losing creatures at an accelerating rate: Species of frogs, lizards, fish and birds have all gone extinct as their habitats have been fragmented, degraded and destroyed by humans. Now, as the Earth grows warmer due to the burning of fossil fuels, the rapid disruption of the climate is placing even bigger stresses on species that are already struggling to survive.
http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2016/04/18/extinction-crisis-warming-world/82642298/ & http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/t/-8654598417117851837

April 20, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Ukraine sticks with nuclear power, ignoring Chernobyl disaster

chernobylChernobyl Anniversary: Ukraine Holds Fast to Nuclear Energy Despite Disaster, NBC News, by ALEXEY EREMENKO  CHERNOBYL, 17 Apr 16 Ukraine — Three decades after the Chernobyl disaster sent a radioactive cloud over much of Europe, opposition to nuclear power has fizzled into obscurity here.

The huge blast and fire immediately killed 31 people in the northern corner of what is now Ukraine on April 26, 1986. The total death toll is disputed but theWorld Health Organization has estimated that 4,000 other fatalities will eventually be linked to the worst nuclear power plant disaster in history.

With its reactor that burned for days and miles-long columns of evacuation buses carrying thousands of people away from the plume of radiation, memories of the disaster remain vivid in Europe. Fallout was recorded as far away as 1,450 miles away in Britain as well as in Norway.

Worldwide shock turned to anger and triggered calls for a wholesale reassessment of the industry. Germany even plans to decommission all of its reactors by 2022.

But while the incident left locals in what was then the Soviet Union with a first-hand glimpse of the dangers, Ukraine is now among the countries most dependent on atomic fission. …….

CHERNOBYL, Ukraine — Three decades after the Chernobyl disaster sent a radioactive cloud over much of Europe, opposition to nuclear power has fizzled into obscurity here.

The huge blast and fire immediately killed 31 people in the northern corner of what is now Ukraine on April 26, 1986. The total death toll is disputed but theWorld Health Organization has estimated that 4,000 other fatalities will eventually be linked to the worst nuclear power plant disaster in history.

With its reactor that burned for days and miles-long columns of evacuation buses carrying thousands of people away from the plume of radiation, memories of the disaster remain vivid in Europe. Fallout was recorded as far away as 1,450 miles away in Britain as well as in Norway.

Worldwide shock turned to anger and triggered calls for a wholesale reassessment of the industry. Germany even plans to decommission all of its reactors by 2022.

But while the incident left locals in what was then the Soviet Union with a first-hand glimpse of the dangers, Ukraine is now among the countries most dependent on atomic fission. Every second light bulb is powered by uranium.

“Nuclear energy is the foundation of the country’s electricity generation system,” said Ilona Zayec, a spokeswoman for the state monopoly Energoatom.

Last year, the country’s 15 reactors produced 82,000-megawatt-hours of electricity, or 56.5 percent of Ukraine’s total energy consumption, according to Energoatom.

Only France got a larger share of their energy from nuclear power in 2015,according to the United Nations’ IAEA watchdog. The United States only generates 19.5 percent from fission.

“There’s not much trust toward the nuclear industry after the disaster,” said Tetiana Verbytska of the State Scientific and Technical Center for Nuclear and Radiation Safety of Ukraine, a state nuclear safety watchdog. “But while the majority of the population think ‘it’s not safe,’ there’s no alternative.”…….

The disaster is attributed to a combination of faulty construction and human error. However, three of four Chernobyl reactors continued to crank out energy for a decade-plus after the accident……

Geiger counters still go wild in hotspots in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, a 19-mile security area around the plant that has become an overgrown forest full of thriving wildlife. A short stay is relatively safe, but the area won’t be fit for human habitation for at least 10,000 years………

That doesn’t mean that Ukrainians believe the nuclear industry is safe — a majority don’t. Almost 65 percent of Ukrainians said their nuclear plants weren’t safe in a 2011 nationwide survey by the Razumkov Center, which is the latest poll available. But only 10 percent of Ukrainians said the nation should shut down its reactors.

The government in Kiev has mothballed plans for more reactors — an unaffordable endeavor in the current economy — but wants to prolong the shelf life of existing ones.

Safety, not the banning of nuclear facilities, is the focus for officials………The answer to why Ukraine preferred boosting safety to decommission is simple: Nuclear energy remains the second cheapest source of electricity in Ukraine after hydropower. However, critics say that’s because the cost of decommissioning existing reactors is not factored in to such calculations…….

The National Ecological Center of Ukraine’s Urbansky has a different view. He was a 12-year-old living around 60 miles away in Kiev at the time of the explosion.

“I feel I was affected, because later I had some health problems,” he said. “[Government officials] tried to do everything not to link any disease with Chernobyl accident, even those who had cancers and leukemia.” http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/chernobyl-anniversary-ukraine-holds-fast-nuclear-energy-despite-disaster-n554036

April 18, 2016 Posted by | general | 2 Comments

“The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster is a Serious Crime”: Interview with Koide Hiroaki

Mar 15, 2016. Koide Hiroaki (66) has emerged as an influential voice and a central figure in the anti-nuclear movement since the nuclear meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi of March 11, 2011. He spent his entire career as a nuclear engineer working towards the abolition of nuclear power plants. His powerful critique of the “nuclear village” and active involvement in anti-nuclear movements “earned him an honorable form of purgatory as a permanent assistant professor at Kyoto University.”

Koide retired from Kyoto University in the spring of 2015, but continues to write and act as an important voice of conscience for many who share his vision of the future free from nuclear energy and weapons. He has authored 20 books on the subject. Professor Kasai Hirotaka and I visited his office at Kyoto University’s Research Reactor Institute in Kumatori, Osaka, on December 26th, 2014 for this interview.

We believe that the contents of the interview, which offer new information about the degree of radioactive contamination and invaluable insight into Koide’s ethical and political stance as a scientist, remain crucial for our critical reflection on ecological destruction, the violation of human rights, and individual responsibility. http://apjjf.org//2016/06/Hirano.html

April 18, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Founder of Chernobyl Children International (CCI) Adi Roche to address UN

Adi Roche to address UN on 30th anniversary of Chernobyl nuclear disaster http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/adi-roche-to-address-un-on-30th-anniversary-of-chernobyl-nuclear-disaster-393315.html April 16, 2016 Eoin English 

Humanitarian Adi Roche is to make a landmark address to the UN General Assembly in New York to mark the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster the week after next. In an unprecedented move, the Belarusian government is to provide speaking time to Ms Roche, the voluntary CEO and founder of Chernobyl Children International (CCI), in recognition of CCI and Ireland’s role helping the victims of the accident.

It is the first time an NGO has been given a country’s allocated speaking time at the assembly. CCI is the only UN-recognised NGO working in the Chernobyl-affected areas.

Ms Roche will appeal for ongoing global support for the ‘liquidators’ whose heroism containing the fire and radiation in the crippled power plant saved Europe from a nuclear catastrophe. She will also press for the speedy completion of the €1.5bn sarcophagus which is being built to make Chernobyl safe for the next 100 years.

Ireland has contributed €8m towards the massive international construction project which has been beset by delays.

“On this, the 30th anniversary of the worst nuclear disaster in history, it is a chilling reminder that the effects of this catastrophic nuclear accident are far from over. The radioactive contamination is still having an adverse effect on the lives and health of the people of the Chernobyl regions. For many people 30 years ago is like reading ancient history, however for the victims it remains an unfolding tragedy,” she said.

April 18, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Shutdown of New Jersey nuclear reactor

N.J. nuclear reactor shut down. Here’s the reason why, NJ.com,   By Bill Gallo Jr. | For NJ.com  April 15, 2016 LOWER ALLOWAYS CREEK TWP. — One of three nuclear reactors in Salem County has been shut down for refueling and maintenance work, an official said.

The Salem 1 unit was taken off-line at 8 p.m. Thursday, according to Joe Delmar, spokesman for the plant’s operator, PSEG Nuclear…….. In-house and supplemental personnel will perform more than 20,000 different activities while the reactor is off-line, according to Delmar.

Some of the larger projects include replacing three main power transformers and digital feed system along with inspections of systems, pumps, motors, valves, actuators and seals. Additionally, one third of 193 fuel assemblies in the reactor’s core will be replaced with new ones……Delmar did not say how long Salem 1 would be shut down. Typically, a nuclear plant refueling outage lasts about a month…..The three reactors comprise the second-largest commercial nuclear generating complex in the U.S……http://www.nj.com/salem/index.ssf/2016/04/nj_nuclear_reactor_shut_down_heres_the_reason_why.html

April 16, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Nuclear issue is a complicated one for election in Wales

Welsh election: Nuclear issue ‘difficult’ for Plaid, BBC News 14 Apr 16   Opposing nuclear power is difficult for Plaid Cymru, its leader has said, because of the jobs which depend on it.

Leanne Wood told a live BBC TV election special the party was “very clear” in its opposition to nuclear weapons.

But she said in terms of jobs on Anglesey, the nation had “put all our eggs in the nuclear basket” with 6,000 people working at Wylfa power station.

Ms Wood said if a replacement for Wylfa did not go ahead, an alternative source of jobs would have to be found.

Speaking on BBC Wales TV’s Ask the Leader programme in Aberystwyth, she said: “Plaid Cymru is opposed to Trident and we’ve been very clear on the case of opposing nuclear weapons.

“On the case of nuclear power that’s a little bit more difficult for us, I will be honest with you. This has not been a straight forward question for Plaid Cymru.

“I’m not personally convinced that nuclear power is the answer and I’m not convinced that it stacks up financially.

“I would prefer us to take more of a renewables-based approach. We’ve got in our manifesto an aim to meet all the electricity needs in as far as we can in Wales… renewably by 2035.”

Plans are being made for a new power station called Wylfa Newydd to be built next to the old Wylfa plant, which is being decommissioned.

Horizon Nuclear Power, owned by the Japanese giant Hitachi, is still in the process of drawing up detailed plans, which will be submitted by 2017………http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2016-wales-36050553

April 15, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Nuclear terrorism

The Reality of Fighting Nuclear Terror, GeoPolitical MonitorApril 14, 2016 K.N. Pandita In the two-day summit in Washington (March 31 – April 1), representatives of 49 countries interacted on the danger of terrorists acquiring nuclear weapons as “the most immediate and extreme threat to global security.”

Have the four meetings of NSS since 2009 achieved the objective? It is a moot question. Radioactive materials in numerous countries are still vulnerable. International nuclear security architecture continues to be fragmented and predominantly based on nonbinding measures. And the NSS has not left behind a successor.

Russia’s refusal to participate in Washington Summit dealt a blow to the success of NSS because she has the largest stock of weapons-usable materials in the world.

Concerns about the security of nuclear holdings apply to various countries, ranging from Pakistan, where terrorist groups are highly active, to the United States, who’s Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee – home to large stocks of HEU – was infiltrated in 2012 by a group of activists.  Keeping away North Korea and Iran from the NSS puts the very concept of the summit into controversy.

Without true multilateral initiatives, success in battling nuclear terror may remain elusive. Initiatives like the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism and the G-8 Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations, European Union, and Interpol all have significant role to play.

Are the big nuclear powers really willing to make a breakthrough and secure the world against the threat of nuclear weapons falling in wrong hands? The summit did not propose concrete steps towards this objective.

Pakistan, the unstable nuclear power in South Asia, is vulnerable to nuclear pilferage. That notwithstanding,  the U.S. has sold eight nuclear-capable F-16 Fighters to her on the plea of strengthening her thrust to quell terror and insurgency in her north. In the past, Pakistan has used American gifted weapons against India. It is the United States’ indirect recognition of Pakistan legitimizing use of the nuclear option. Put simply, the decision grossly contradicts the spirit of the NSS…….https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-reality-of-fighting-nuclear-terror/

April 15, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Dangerous state of aging nuclear reactors in Ukraine

Chernobyl nuclear disaster marks 30-year anniversary… ABC News By freelance correspondent Elle Hardy in the Ukrainian town of Pripyat, 12 Apr 16 “………Olexi Pasyuk, from environmental advocacy group Bankwatch, said neglect extends beyond the human tragedy of the disaster.

“Twelve out of 15 nuclear reactors in Ukraine will have passed their 30-year lifespan between 2010 and 2020 and the Government now has to extend them,” he said.

“The Government commissioned a paper which outlined all of the problems with their policy [of extending reactor life spans], so they dismissed the paper and had a new, more favourable one written.

“It’s a political issue — they don’t want to be seen to be buying gas from the Russians.”

Mr Usatenko sees a more sinister side to the ongoing regional tensions and conflict with Russia.

“The state of the Ukrainian nuclear power plants, thanks to government corruption, are considered by the Russian military as well-located nuclear bombs in enemy territory,” he said……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-12/chernobyl-nuclear-disaster-marks-30-years-with-extreme-tours/7317678

April 13, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Pope invites Bernie Sanders to Vatican – similar views on environment, climate change

US election: Bernie Sanders invited to Vatican by Pope, BBC News 10 Apr 16 

  • Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has accepted an invitation from the Pope to the Vatican.

    Mr Sanders, who is Jewish, accepted an invitation to Rome for a conference at the end of next week.

    The Vatican visit is four days before the primary contest in New York, a competitive battle between him and front-runner Hillary Clinton.

    Mr Sanders said he was not sure whether he would meet the Pope but he was a big fan of the pontiff.

    The Vermont senator said they share the same views on inequality.

    “He’s trying to inject this sense of morality into how we do economics… and we need that absolutely desperately.”

    He will attend a conference on social, economic and environmental issues and give a speech on 15 April, his campaign said.8 April 2016…….http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35999269

April 11, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

‘Innovation’ – greenwash buzzword from the nuclear lobby

Innovating Canadian Nuclear Greenwash, Graham’s Green Design, 9 Apr 16 

“…..We need to focus and invest on green solutions that will deliver the best ROI* for Canada, not what is being sold as green. Is government doing enough? For now, I do not think so.

With climate change neatly spotlighted in the Justin Trudeau showcase of environmental spending, a lot of money is leaving fossil fuels and innovating towards green energy. Even the big dogs are buying into solar and wind energy, even after the big dogs were recommending another Stephen Harper Government for Canada. Funny how those that fought green energy are now buying in and getting grants with our tax dollars. Should Canada allow corporations that fought climate, pollution and basic economics benefit from Canada’s new manifesto? Can we trust groups that thoughtlessly delayed critical action? Is it smart to risk our only chance to succeed with teaming up with the groups that delayed and fought all progress?

Greenwash?

When it comes to green energy, the next generation in poor ideas is being touted as a climate saviour — the same folks that denied climate change two years ago are now recommending nuclear energy as a solution for climate change. Big nuclear has been quietly patient. Nuclear energy has a carbon footprint that’s hidden — just because there are no smokestacks doesn’t mean complex analysis finds nuclear energy is a poor long-term solution. As I say on Twitter, “#DoTheMath“. The nuclear lobby has been quietly doing the green dance, waiting for the next gravy wave to cut-in with their “green” climate solution.

I have noticed the nuclear lobby slowly working the room for the past 5 years, minting new cheerleaders, some asserting that #Fukushima had no health impacts. One nuclear troll even asserted that nuclear pollution doesn’t hurt people — wow. Aside from nuclear being more expensive, having a larger carbon footprint than renewables, the large grid model of modern energy distribution seems to be obsolete. Large generation and large transmission seem elegant by design, but are expensive, and less profitable, versus smaller local distributed generation that leverage green energy storage systems and #smartgrid energy management technology. …….

I am glad that Justin Trudeau didn’t announce big investments in new nuclear, but the nuclear lobby is still working our room. Recently hearing Paul Wells spoke at the Canadian Nuclear dog and pony show — mostly smearing Justin Trudeau, he fails to make a clear case for nuclear energy. A ten year old girl can probably tell you why solar energy is cleaner than fossilfuels, but Paul doesn’t seem to have a home run case for nuclear — telling……

I noticed Paul didn’t provide any hard metrics to quickly and clearly demonstrate why nuclear is a superior choice for Canada. Has Paul been reading up on a nuclear greenwash site? I respect his consideration towards improving climate and energy security, but being in a position of influence, I thought he would bring a strong argument — missing, just cheerleading from what I saw.

I thought his endorsement was weak. It isn’t easy to compare solar, wind, and nuclear energy, I will give Paul Wells that. Seeing his talk empty of any valid analysis makes me wonder how he came to his conclusions. Is Paul using the latest in LEAN Manufacturing Business Intelligence systems? Does Paul think it’s Justin Trudeau’s responsibility to help support the future failure of nuclear energy? We see fossil fuels suffering this fate now, can’t compete on price — green is cheaper and doesn’t create pollution while generating energy.

When it comes to comparing nuclear to the “others”, it’s smart to remember that big nuclear is being idled in America as it’s not cost competitive with mixed energy markets. Nuclear loses money when competition is added. For me, a manufacturing specialist, it is easy to understand why nuclear is more expensive — more complexity, security & risk equals a higher cost of energy delivery. Understanding how big nuclear energy is a poor fit in future mixed energy markets is a good method to see that nuclear isn’t green, it’s greenwash. http://www.grahamsgreendesign.com/blog/2016/3/3/green-vs-greenwash-nuclear-toronto-canada-design-innovation-climate-security-cities

April 11, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »