nuclear costs « nuclear-news

Obama provides $8 for nuclear, $1billion for solar

So why is Obama providing 8.3B in loan guarantees for nuclear fission power plants?

Because it’s all about the money for elections. Which is a different diary.

8.3B for nukes,1.4b for Solar, The Seminal, By: ubetchaiam , February 24, 2010 Continue reading →

February 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, renewable energy, renewables, solar | Leave a comment

Uranium mining threatens Public Health and Indigenous Sacred Lands

Uranium Mining Begins Near Grand Canyon: Thousands of Claims Threaten Public Health & Sacred Lands :: Peace, Earth & Justice News Feb 24, 2010 Grand Canyon, AZ — In defiance of legal challenges and a U.S. Government moratorium, Canadian company Denison Mines has started mining uranium on the north rim of the Grand Canyon. Continue reading →

February 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | indigenous issues, USA | antinuclear, cancer, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

After decades, uranium mining areas still radioactive

Enviros: Uranium mines still too hot CYNDY COLE AZ Daily Sun , February 20,
Local environmentalists said Thursday’s findings on past uranium mining confirmed what they suspected: That it led to uranium contamination on the Arizona Strip north of the Grand Canyon, and that mining is not safe. Continue reading →

February 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment, USA | cancer, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear weapons, radiation, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

President Obama has let the nuclear industry be caught in its own trap

Though the President’s critics on the left do not recognize a strategic move in the loan guarantees to new nuclear, there is very likely method in what seems madness. The nuclear industry proved in the 1970s and 1980s, to those who were paying attention, that it is not viable.

New Nuclear to be Hoist on its own Petard, RENEWABLE ENERGY WORLD, February 23, 2010“…the phrase hoist with one’s own petard…means ‘to be harmed by one’s own plan to harm someone else’ or ‘to fall into one’s own trap’…” (Wikipedia)Announcements from the Obama administration of new financial support for the nuclear industry were met by declarations that the long-anticipated nuclear renaissance is finally at hand but the reality is quite different. Continue reading →

February 24, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, reactor | Leave a comment

Does UK really need Trident nuclear ‘deterrent’?

Army chiefs question need for Trident nuclear deterrent Guardian UK, by Richard Norton-Taylor, 23 February 2010 1Nuclear missile system is the weapon ‘least likely’ to be used by UK forces in future conflicts, say senior military sources

Army chiefs question need for Trident nuclear deterrent | UK news | guardian.co.uk

February 24, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, weapons and war | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

AREVA’s deceptive nuclear spin

AREVA tells only half the story, NUCLEAR REACTION, 24 Feb 2010, “….it’s business as usual at AREVA’s mines in Niger despite the military coup that took place in the country last week.The industry also needs to show us all that it can deal with the highly radiaoctive waste that nuclear reactors produce in a safe, clean fashion. AREVA in particularly are singularly failing in that regard. Again, is the implication that we shouldn’t worry or care about wat happens at end of the nuclear chain? Continue reading →

February 24, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | France, spinbuster | antinuclear, AREVA, cancer, France, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, radiation, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

Vermont nuclear plant might herald the end of nuclear industry’s resuscitation

Obama’s nuclear vision suffers setback as Vermont plant faces shutdown Vermont would be the first state to close a nuclear reactor after 38-year-old Yankee’s history of leaking cancer-causing tritium guardian.co.uk 23 February 2010
Barack Obama’s new dream of a nuclear renaissance faces a major reality check tomorrow when the state of Vermont is expected to shut down an ageing nuclear reactor with a history of leaks. Continue reading →

February 24, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive, reactor | Leave a comment

Failing Nuclear industry trying to save itself in reactor sales to China?

Here’s how the shell game could work. If the coal industry could sell outdated, pollution-spewing, coal-fired power plants to China, could the nuclear power industry do the same thing? Could they get rid of their unresolved and unfunded decommissioning headache with the same trick?

(USA) How Do You Say “Oh Crap!” in Chinese?, THE HUFFINGTON POST, Alexia Parks, February 22, 2010 China is picking up the worst of American technology along with its best. For example, to keep up with U.S. consumer demand, China has bought and imported the worst of our outdated, pollution-spewing, coal-fired power plants. American coal power plant owners made out like bandits in the sale and transfer of outdated technology. Under-regulated, their Chinese counterparts have made millions on their rapid manufacture of products for the U.S. market…………. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, China | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

U.S. Supreme Court to hear challenge against nuclear plant

South Carolina’s nuclear fight with Obama heads to Supreme Court, South Carolina News 23 Feb 2010 In what could have far-reaching implications for efforts to build new nuclear power plants in the U.S., the South Carolina Supreme Court as set a hearing date on a challenge against a new nuclear reactor project planned in the state. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear wastes | Leave a comment

Nuclear lobby trying to sell a technological corpse

when you hear some hired gun selling nukes, remember: even $645 million can only buy so much green lipstick for a dead radioactive pig.

Harvey Wasserman: $600 Million Lipstick for a Dead Radioactive Pig, 23 Feb 2010 “……In the face of that $645 million cash tsunami, grassroots activists still stopped $50 billion in loan guarantees three times since 2007. No new US reactor construction has started since the 1970s, when public opinion was over 70% in favor of atomic power, and Richard Nixon promised 1000 US reactors by the year 2000.
With green jobs advocate Van Jones ditched and Obama now openly in the nuclear camp, atomic energy is still a loser. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin | Leave a comment

UK’s nuclear navy scrapyard problem

Navy dock in danger of becoming a ‘nuclear dumping ground’ The Guardian Matthew Taylor, 22 February 2010The MoD has put forward plans to use the Devonport dockyard in Plymouth as a centre for dismantling radioactive submarines
Military chiefs are running out of space to store the UK’s growing number of obsolete nuclear submarines, prompting fears that one of the country’s busiest naval ports is set to be turned into a nuclear scrapyard. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radioactive | Leave a comment

How the nuclear lobby buys politicians and media

$600 Million Lipstick for a Dead Radioactive Pig THE HUFFINGTON POST, Harvey Wasserman February 22, 2010The mystery has been solved.Where is this “new reactor renaissance” coming from?There has been no deep, thoughtful re-making or re-evaluation of atomic technology. No solution to the nuke waste problem. No making reactors economically sound. No private insurance against radioactive disasters by terror or error. No grassroots citizens now desperate to live near fragile containment domes and outtake pipes spewing radioactive tritium at 27 US reactors.No, nothing about atomic energy has really changed.Except this: $645 million spent on lobbying and media manipulation. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, spinbuster, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin | Leave a comment

Utah resisting dumping of depleted uranium radioactive nuclear wastes

Utah gov: 2 trains of SC waste won’t come to Utah, THE HUFFINGTON POST, Brock Bergakis, February 22, 2010. SALT LAKE CITY — About 6,500 tons of low-level radioactive waste from South Carolina won’t be coming to Utah as originally planned, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert said Monday in announcing a verbal agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, wastes | antinuclear, depleted, nuclear, nuclear costs, radiation, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

Obama passes nuclear risks on to taxpayer

Obama asks taxpayers to shoulder nuclear risk MNN – Mother Nature Network, by Karl Burkart, 23 Feb 2010 Banks won’t touch them they are so financially risky. So why does Obama want U.S. taxpayers to fund nuclear plants when there is a 50% chance they will fail? Sun, Feb 21 2010

Whether you are Republican or Democrat, pro-nuclear or anti-nuclear, you probably will agree with me that it is wrong to ask the American taxpayers to fund an investment that is so risky it has a 50 percent chance of failing. Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs | Leave a comment

Alec Baldwin on the truth about nuclear reactors

The Truth About Nuclear Power in Utility Reactors THE HUFFINGTON POST, Alec Baldwin: February 22, 2010 “………The reactor operations at Brookhaven were reported to have released billions of gallons of tritiated water into the headwaters of the Peconic River during the period of its operations from 1965 to 1996……… Continue reading →

February 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster, USA | cancer, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive, reactor, reactors | Leave a comment