Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

The problematic history of nuclear power in the United Kingdom (UK) suggests that a stronger focus on sustainable energy alternatives is a better and more cost-effective option. This is a conclusion of a report released today by The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI). The British Nuclear Industry: Status and Prospects provides a detailed analysis of the current state of the nuclear power industry in the UK, including its energy strategy and the government's plans for possible new nuclear capacity. While the political momentum in support of nuclear options continues to grow, the study's findings show that the government's strategy is once again thwarting technologies that might prove cheaper and more reliable. "The future of UK's nuclear power is clearly tied to meeting two-long term challenges: Tackling climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions both in the UK and abroad, and secondly ensuring the security of UK's energy supplies," writes Ian Davis, the author of the report. "The government's obsession with nuclear power is undermining and marginalizing more efficient and safer technologies - the real energy solutions."

The right-wing Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) government continued its campaign to pull Taiwan back into the past Wednesday with a concerted campaign to reverse a previous multi-partisan consensus on a "nuclear free" energy policy and gain endorsement from a high-profile National Energy Conference for a new wave of construction of nuclear power plants. Although Premier Liu Chao-shiuan supervised the absurd listing of nuclear power as a "clean alternative energy" in a "sustainable energy action program" last June, both President Ma Ying-jeou and Liu shied away from direct mention of "nuclear power" in their addresses to Taiwan's third public-private NEC.

"Agency Is Refusing to Adhere to an Order to Release Document That Would Help Determine Safety of New Nuclear Reactors WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) should stop balking and provide a critical document that would reveal how the owners of a Texas nuclear plant expansion project plan to deal with a fire or explosion, three public interest groups told the commission late last week. Three administrative judges of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board have ordered the agency to provide at least a redacted version, but NRC staffers have refused. The NRC's lack of transparency could impact the ability to get adequate safety-related information not only about the South Texas Project (STP) but about other proposed reactors around the country as well. Late Friday, the groups - the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, Public Citizen and the South Texas Association for Responsible Energy - filed a brief with the NRC. It noted that the NRC staff's refusal to provide the information violated President Barack Obama's new transparency policy. The groups also said the NRC is acting arbitrarily and trying to shut the public out of NRC proceedings."

"In 2008, after the opening of 8 brand new nuclear plants in Japan (2 on the Island of Hokkaidō, 3 on Honshū, and 1 each on Kyūshū, Shikoku, and Tanagashima, the last of which hosts the Japanese Aerospace Agency headquarters and uses roughly 2% of all Japan's energy despite only about 21,714 inhabitants) Japan became the second largest nuclear power user in the world with 63 nuclear reactor Nuclear reactor A nuclear reactor is a device in which nuclear chain reactions are initiated, controlled, and sustained at a steady rate.The most significant use of nuclear reactors is as an energy source for the generation of electrical power and for the power in some ships... s. These provide 34.5% of Japan's electricity. Since 1973 nuclear energy has been a national strategic priority because Japan is heavily dependent on imported fuel, with fuel imports accounting for 61% of energy production."

Beyond ecological imperialism Climate change isn't just a battle between rich and poor - it shows how an obsession with economic growth is a dead end o guardian.co.uk, Monday 21 December 2009 12.30 GMT So the Copenhagen summit did not deliver any hope of substantive change, or even any indication that the world's leaders are sufficiently aware of the vastness and urgency of the problem. But is that such a surprise? Nothing in the much-hyped runup to the summit suggested that the organisers and participants had genuine ambitions to change course and stop or reverse a process of clearly unsustainable growth. Part of the problem is that the issue of climate change is increasingly portrayed as that of competing interests between countries. Thus, the summit has been interpreted variously as a fight between the "two largest culprits" - the US and China - or between a small group of developed countries and a small group of newly emerging countries (the group of four - China, India, Brazil and South Africa), or at best between rich and poor countries. The historical legacy of past growth in the rich countries that has a current adverse impact is certainly keenly felt in the developing world. It is not just the past: current per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the developed world are still many multiples of that in any developing country, including China. So the attempts by northern commentators to lay blame on some countries for derailing the result by pointing to this discrepancy are seen in most developing countries as further evidence of an essentially colonial outlook. But describing this as a fight between countries misses the essential point: that the issue is really linked to an economic system - capitalism - that is crucially dependent upon rapid growth as its driving force, even if this "growth" does not deliver better lives for the people. So there is no questioning of the supposition that rich countries with declining populations mu

Beyond ecological imperialism Climate change isn't just a battle between rich and poor - it shows how an obsession with economic growth is a dead end o guardian.co.uk, Monday 21 December 2009 12.30 GMT So the Copenhagen summit did not deliver any hope of substantive change, or even any indication that the world's leaders are sufficiently aware of the vastness and urgency of the problem. But is that such a surprise? Nothing in the much-hyped runup to the summit suggested that the organisers and participants had genuine ambitions to change course and stop or reverse a process of clearly unsustainable growth. Part of the problem is that the issue of climate change is increasingly portrayed as that of competing interests between countries. Thus, the summit has been interpreted variously as a fight between the "two largest culprits" - the US and China - or between a small group of developed countries and a small group of newly emerging countries (the group of four - China, India, Brazil and South Africa), or at best between rich and poor countries. The historical legacy of past growth in the rich countries that has a current adverse impact is certainly keenly felt in the developing world. It is not just the past: current per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the developed world are still many multiples of that in any developing country, including China. So the attempts by northern commentators to lay blame on some countries for derailing the result by pointing to this discrepancy are seen in most developing countries as further evidence of an essentially colonial outlook. But describing this as a fight between countries misses the essential point: that the issue is really linked to an economic system - capitalism - that is crucially dependent upon rapid growth as its driving force, even if this "growth" does not deliver better lives for the people. So there is no questioning of the supposition that rich countries with declining populations mu

"The FY 2011 budget request will be released on Monday, February 1, 2010. The Obama administration has laid out an aggressive nonproliferation agenda that includes deep reductions in nuclear stockpiles, ratification of a nuclear test ban, and decreased prominence for nuclear weapons in US defense policy. Despite this agenda, the Department of Energy's (DOE) budget request will ask Congress to significantly increase nuclear weapons activities, including funding for construction of new facilities that will expand U.S. warhead production capacity. The DOE request will not reflect recent independent scientific conclusions that existing nuclear weapons can be reliably maintained for decades under current, well-established programs. The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA), a national network representing communities downwind and downstream from U.S. nuclear weapons facilities, is concerned that increased funding for nuclear energy and weapons research and production will rob precious resources for needed environmental cleanup and clean, sustainable energy solutions. Items of interest:"

"More than half of Santiago residents do not support nuclear energy as an energy source in Chile, according to a recent survey by the Universidad Diego Portales' center for energy and sustainable development. Further, 62 percent said they favor wind energy as the preferred source of energy. Around 25 percent said they favored nuclear energy. The survey was taken in light of the government's growing interest in nuclear energy. When citizens were asked about the risks posed by such projects, 54.8 percent cited nuclear energy's impact on health and the environment, 21.1 percent cited a possible lead of radioactive material and 18.6 percent cited risks associated with the lack of experienced professionals in the country. Opposition grew stronger when those surveyed were asked about possibly building a nuclear plant in the Metropolitan Region: 65 percent opposed and 18 percent were in favor."

"A nuclear reactor in Ehime Prefecture moved a step closer early Tuesday to starting Japan's second ''pluthermal'' power generation operation with the use of plutonium-uranium mixed oxide fuel, launching a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction, its operator said."

"The U.S. and India have agreed on procedures for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from the U.S., helping General Electric Co.'s atomic venture bid for contracts to build power plants in the South Asian nation. The agreement will enable India to reprocess U.S. nuclear material under International Atomic Energy Agency standards and allow American companies to participate in the country's civil nuclear energy sector, the U.S. State Department said in a statement today. GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, a subsidiary of Fairfield, Connecticut-based General Electric and Monroeville, Pennsylvania-based Westinghouse, a subsidiary of Tokyo's Toshiba Corp., are likely to bid for nuclear energy contracts as the world's second fastest-growing major economy builds generating plants to end blackouts and reduce poverty. India plans to raise nuclear generation capacity 10-fold over the next decade to sustain its economic growth. The State Department statement didn't provide more details and S.K. Malhotra, a spokesman for India's Department of Atomic Energy, couldn't be reached on his mobile phone. "

"Issue #153 - April 2010 The Sunflower is a monthly e-newsletter providing educational information on nuclear weapons abolition and other issues relating to global security. Help us spread the word and forward this to a friend. Visit www.wagingpeace.org/donate to help sustain this valuable resource by making a donation. To receive our free monthly e-newsletter subscribe at www.wagingpeace.org/subscribe"

"Nuclear power has never lived up to the promises of its backers. Their latest claim -- that nuclear energy represents an easy answer to global warming -- has as much validity as that old industry chestnut of producing energy "too cheap to meter." Let's not be duped again. Four decades ago, when I served as national coordinator for the first Earth Day, millions of Americans mobilized on behalf of the environment. This year, we know that the centerpiece of a healthy environment is safe, clean and sustainable energy. Climate change was a phrase unknown back in 1970; today it is part of our popular vocabulary. Halting the advance of global warming tops the priority list of environmental issues that threaten our well-being."

"For the third consecutive legislative session, myopic legislators have introduced illogical, almost surreal rationalizations for why they should repeal one state law that has successfully protected Illinois for 23 years, and sabotage a second that promotes zero-carbon, sustainable and less-polluting energy. I refer here to attempts to repeal what has become known as the "nuclear construction moratorium." This 1987 law simply says: Illinois will not permit the construction of new nuclear plants until there exists an environmentally responsible way of permanently disposing of the dangerous radioactive wastes they create. The Sears Tower, John Hancock Center and Illinois' currently operating nuclear reactors were being constructed around the same time. Imagine if legislators of the day - touting reasons like jobs, federal money and proud legacies - allowed these and future skyscrapers to be built without bathrooms. This is precisely the (il)logic of today's legislators calling for moratorium repeal."

"President Barack Obama sent a landmark arms-reduction treaty with Russia to the Senate on Thursday for ratification and called for $80 billion in nuclear funding, which could help win opposition support. Barack Obama | Russia Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the funds, which would be spent over a decade, were needed to "rebuild and sustain America's aging nuclear stockpile." The treaty, which must be ratified by the Senate and Russia's parliament before it goes into force, would reduce the strategic nuclear arsenals deployed by the former Cold War foes by 30 percent within seven years."

"The Obama administration, seeking to bolster congressional support for the new strategic arms treaty with Russia, plans to spend $180 billion over the next decade to upgrade the nation's nuclear weapons complex, keep warheads capable and modernize strategic delivery systems, according to documents delivered Thursday to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. With Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates scheduled to testify in support of the treaty next week, the administration sent lawmakers the treaty package, including a classified report that lays out in detail its program to sustain "a strong nuclear deterrent for the duration of the new START treaty and beyond." "

BankTrack, in cooperation with a number of working partners, today launches www.nuclearbanks.org, a new website mapping the involvement of 45 leading commercial banks in funding nuclear power projects and companies active in the nuclear sector. [1] BankTrack considers nuclear energy a grave danger for people and planet. The renewed interest in nuclear energy also poses a severe obstacle to achieving a sustainable solution to the climate crisis.[2] The website provides information on 867 transactions, involving a total of 124 banks providing finance to over 70 nuclear companies. Between 2000 and 2009, these banks…read more"

"Japan could phase out nuclear power by the end of next year and generate 43 percent of its electricity by 2020 from renewable energy, according to a report compiled by Greenpeace International and the Tokyo-based Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies. To meet these goals, Greenpeace and ISEP called on Japan to reduce electricity demand by 1.7 percent a year on average between now and 2020. Other proposals are to use more liquid natural gas, which releases less emissions than coal or oil-fired plants."

The nuclear accident in Japan and resulting public concern about earthquake safety at Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant have led PG&E to ask federal regulators to delay final implementation of the license renewal process for the plant. In a letter dated Sunday to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, PG&E calls its request "prudent" in light of the damage the Japanese nuclear plant sustained a month ago after the earthquake and tsunami there. SIMILAR STORIES: A bad reaction to Diablo license debate State's authority over Diablo Canyon plant is limited SLO County supervisors raise Diablo concerns Diablo safety to be discussed Viewpoint: Before Diablo relicensing, concerns must be answered "PG&E therefore requests that the commission delay the final processing of the LRA (license renewal application) such that the renewed operating licenses, if approved, would not be issued until after PG&E has completed the 3-D seismic studies and submitted a report to the NRC addressing the results of those studies," wrote John Conway, PG&E's chief nuclear officer.

Some of the spent nuclear fuel rods stored in the No. 4 reactor building of the crisis-hit Fukushima Daiichi power plant were confirmed to be damaged, but most of them are believed to be in sound condition, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday. The firm known as TEPCO said its analysis of a 400-milliliter water sample taken Tuesday from the No. 4 unit's spent nuclear fuel pool revealed the damage to some fuel rods in such a pool for the first time, as it detected higher-than-usual levels of radioactive iodine-131, cesium-134 and cesium-137. The No. 4 reactor, halted for a regular inspection before last month's earthquake and tsunami disaster, had all of its 1,331 spent fuel rods and 204 unused fuel rods stored in the pool for the maintenance work and the fuel was feared to have sustained damage from overheating. The cooling period for 548 of the 1,331 rods was shorter than that for others and the volume of decay heat emitted from the fuel in the No. 4 unit pool is larger compared with pools at other reactor buildings. According to TEPCO, radioactive iodine-131 amounting to 220 becquerels per cubic centimeter, cesium-134 of 88 becquerels and cesium-137 of 93 becquerels were detected in the pool water. Those substances are generated by nuclear fission. The government's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said the confirmed radioactive materials were up to 100,000 times higher than normal but that the higher readings may have also been caused by the pouring of rainwater containing much radioactivity or particles of radiation-emitting rubble in the pool.

The No. 1 reactor of the Onagawa nuclear power plant in Miyagi Prefecture on April 7 sustained a jolt greater than what it was designed to withstand during a strong aftershock from the powerful March 11 earthquake, according to nuclear safety officials. The finding raises further doubts about the viability of the assumed quake resistance at the Tohoku Electric Power Co. complex, even though it had been shut down safely after the deadly quake last month. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has instructed the regional utility serving northeastern Japan to analyze the impact of such a jolt on key facilities at the three-reactor plant, the officials said.

An analysis of the co2 gasses produced by the nuclear industry and specifically around uranium mining.