Group items tagged

Arjun Makhijani: The technical case for nuclear power, just like the technical case for wind energy, and solar energy, is partly built on the idea that it's a low CO2 technology. But it's a high cost, high-risk technology, and that's why I think we shouldn't be doing it. That's electrical and nuclear engineer Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. Arjun Makhijani: Nuclear power is very expensive. Today, wind energy, for instance, is cheaper than nuclear power. If you use a combination of efficiency, wind, and solar energy, it would cost less. Makhijani said that there's still no long-term plan for storing radioactive nuclear waste, which some fear could be used to make nuclear weapons. Arjun Makhijani: Plutonium is generated in every nuclear power plant in its operation - about 40 bombs worth every year.

Snake River Alliance Announces November Special Events with Dr. Arjun Makhijani The Snake River Alliance is proud to present a week of events featuring one of the United State's leading energy experts. Dr. Arjun Makhijani holds a Ph.D. in engineering from the University of California at Berkeley. A recognized authority on energy issues, Dr. Makhijani has produced many studies and articles on nuclear fuel cycle related issues, including weapons production, testing, and nuclear waste and has also served as a consultant to United Nations agencies, many non-governmental organizations, and other institutions. He will be accompanied by national Carbon-free and Nuclear-free campaign coordinator and energy activist, Jennifer Nordstrom.

Arjun Makhijani urges utility to seek other sources SCOTTSBORO - An energy analyst whose advice was instrumental in the Tennessee Valley Authority canceling eight reactor projects in the 1970s and '80s said the utility's plan for more nuclear plants now is a mistake. "Why is TVA leading a charge again" toward a nuclear power program that led to an indebtedness of more than $25 billion 20 to 30 years ago, Dr. Arjun Makhijani asked at a news conference Wednesday.

My guest for this week is Arjun Makhijani, author of Carbon-Free and Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy. MP3 Download

"Arjun Makhijani, Head of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, explains the problems in dealing with nuclear waste and dangers related to reprocessing. Share this More from Arjun Makhijani Reprocessing Waste Nuclear Energy: Irrelevant? Nuclear Deterrence Nuclear Waste: French Style"

Interview with Dr. Arjun Makhijani at the San Antonio Clean tech forum on the risks associated with the planned expansion of STP 3 & 4 and the alternatives that should be considered.

Interview with Dr. Arjun Makhijani at the San Antonio Clean tech forum on the risks associated with the planned expansion of STP 3 & 4 and the alternatives that should be considered.

Craig Severance, CPA Author, Business Risks & Costs of New Nuclear Power Dr. Arjun Makhijani President, Institute for Energy & Environmental Research Perform an in depth analysis of the financial risks that San Antonio faces with the proposed expansion of the south texas nuclear project and discuss other alternatives that the city should be considering.

Craig Severance, CPA Author, Business Risks & Costs of New Nuclear Power Dr. Arjun Makhijani President, Institute for Energy & Environmental Research Perform an in depth analysis of the financial risks that San Antonio faces with the proposed expansion of the south texas nuclear project and discuss other alternatives that the city should be considering.

Mayor Julian Castro City of San Antonio,Steve Bartley Interim General Manager, CPS Energy,Craig Severance, CPA Author, Business Risks & Costs of New Nuclear Power,Dr. Patrick Moore Co-Chair, Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, Dr. Arjun Makhijani President, Institute for Energy & Environmental Research At the San Antonio Clean Tech Forum noted pundits square off and discuss the San Antonio's involvement in the proposed expansion of the South Texas Nuclear project.

Mayor Julian Castro City of San Antonio,Steve Bartley Interim General Manager, CPS Energy,Craig Severance, CPA Author, Business Risks & Costs of New Nuclear Power,Dr. Patrick Moore Co-Chair, Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, Dr. Arjun Makhijani President, Institute for Energy & Environmental Research At the San Antonio Clean Tech Forum noted pundits square off and discuss the San Antonio's involvement in the proposed expansion of the South Texas Nuclear project.

By Michele Boyd and Arjun Makhijani A Fact Sheet Produced by Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Thorium "fuel" has been proposed as an alternative to uranium fuel in nuclear reactors. There are not "thorium reactors," but rather proposals to use thorium as a "fuel" in different types of reactors, including existing light-water reactors and various fast breeder reactor designs. Thorium, which refers to thorium-232, is a radioactive metal that is about three times more abundant than uranium in the natural environment. Some of the largest reserves are found in Idaho in the U.S. Large known deposits are in Australia, India, and Norway. The primary U.S. company dvocating for thorium fuel is Thorium Power (www.thoriumpower.com). Unlike the claims made or implied by thorium proponents, however, thorium doesn't solve the proliferation, waste, safety, or cost problems of nuclear power, and it still faces major technical hurdles for commercialization.

CPS Energy announced its cost estimate for two more nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project near Bay City last week. The $13-billion price tag is the latest estimate in a sustained and systemic low-balling by utilities wishing to receive government subsidies. CPS' partner, NRG Energy, recently pegged the cost of units 3 and 4 at $10 billion, a figure that has jumped nearly 50 percent from its original estimate of $5.4 billion. Other analyses, however, have estimated the cost of two new reactors to be nearly 100 percent higher than the CPS estimate. Former Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel official Clarence Johnson recently estimated the cost of STP expansion to be $20 billion to $22 billion, while nuclear engineer and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Dr. Arjun Makhijani estimated a cost of up to $17.5 billion in 2008.

"Depleted uranium from a government cleanup in South Carolina is too radioactive and contains fission waste that should not be buried in Utah, says a new report from technical experts working with the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah. Consulted by Gov. Gary Herbert before his meeting last week with the U.S. Energy Department (DOE), the report says a close look at the federal agency's own paperwork shows that the DU from the Savannah River Site doesn't meet state or federal hazard standards for disposal in EnergySolutions Inc.'s Tooele County landfill. Arjun Makhijani and Harry Chmelynski estimate that between 680 and 5,600 drums of the total 33,000-drum inventory from Savannah River contain more of the fission product technetium-99 than Utah law allows. "

"The Tennessee Valley Authority is preparing to make a key component for America's hydrogen bombs at its Sequoyah Nuclear Plant near Soddy-Daisy. In the White House budget released this week, the U.S. Department of Energy said it wants TVA to make bomb-grade tritium at Sequoyah, similar to what TVA has done at its Watts Bar plant near Spring City, Tenn., for the past decade. TVA officials said Tuesday that adding military production to Sequoyah's energy generation will have only a minimal impact on plant operations and fulfills the agency's federal mission. "We've tested and done this type of production at Watts Bar since 1999 with limited impact on our operations," TVA Vice President Jack Bailey said. PDF: DOE tritium facility But critics said such plans could heighten the risk of a terrorist attack near Chattanooga and weaken U.S. efforts to limit nuclear proliferation abroad."