NUKE NEWS: Feb. 02.10
Compilation:
1. SIGN PETITION: Ontario's Green Future
2. Physicians for Global Survival (PGS) Welcomes New Executive Director
3. Nuclear, renewables options to coal
4. CAN CARBON-CAPTURE MOVE US TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY? – Dr. Jim Harding
5. Moody's weighs in on power pact
6. Obama to boost US nuclear power industry - Possible shift to re-use spent fuel rather than dumping
7. Will Obama Guarantee a New Reactor War?
8. Why Is Obama Trying to Prop Up a Doomed 'Nuclear Renaissance'?
9. Environmental Roundup: February 2, 2010
10. Vt nuke plant leaks renew debate over aging plants
11. Iraq to sue US, Britain over depleted uranium bombs (CAUTION: PHOTO!)
12. No Nukes News - Feb. 1, 2010
13. Deputy PM Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega, tries to "appease" the debate on dumping nuclear waste
14. The Fateful Geological Prize Called Haiti
15. Everybody wants supplies as nuclear power comes roaring back
16. ARMZ and Cameco are negotiating joint projects in Australia and Africa
=========================
1. SIGN PETITION: Ontario's Green Future
[= http://www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca/petition.php ]
Join the 3145 people who are already calling for a responsible electricity plan! Sign the petition for a Nuclear Cost Responsibility Act.
Sign our nuclear cost petition to register your opposition to further taxpayer-funded bailouts for nuclear power.
2. Physicians for Global Survival (PGS) Welcomes New Executive Director
[ http://pgs.ca/?page_id=2973 ]
BY Andrea Levy 12 November 2009
Welcome from PGS President, Dr. Michael Dworkind
When Dr. Dale Dewer offered to take on the position of Executive Director, the Board and I were delighted and excited by the offer of having a physician activist as E.D.
Dale’s vast experience and significant talents and commitment to peace and social justice issues were felt as tremendous assets for PGS. It was felt that her role as Executive Director will move the organizaiton ahead with leadership and work for the eradication of nuclear weapons and the promotion of world peace as mandated in our mision statement.
As Dale started on November 1st, she has already taken on her Executive Director role on multiple levels and we will continue to see her creativity and energy in our future activities nationally and internationally making PGS synonymous with the voice of physicians for peace, sustainability, and social justice in Canada.
Dr. Dale Dewar is a prominent Wynyard doctor and international human rights activist.
Dr. Dewar is a Past President of Physicians for Global Survival, She has worked with the International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) and is active with ICAN, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. She is the Chair of the International Committee of the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada and has been involved in medical education in Iraq, Pakistan and the southern Philippines and has worked extensively with Aboriginal peoples in Canada. She is Past Chair of the Rural and regional Committee of the Saskatchewan Medical Association and presented a position paper to the Uranium Development Partnership on behalf of the Association. She is also a medical columnist on CBC radio and, along with her husband Bill Curry, is the recipient of the SCIC Global Citizen Award for 2008. Dale was privileged to serve as Clerk of Canadian Yearly Meeting (Quakers) 2007 – 2009 and continues as Mentoring Clerk.
In her spare time, she rides horses with her neighbour, Skylar Johnson, hikes, bikes, in-line skates, and cross-country skis. She loves her husband, her children and her siblings – and the prairie sky.
Dr. Dewar and her husband, Bill Curry were honoured with the SCIC Global Citizen Award in January 2009
=====================
3. Nuclear, renewables options to coal
[ http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technolo ... story.html ]
By Journal Staff, edmontonjournal.com February 1, 2010 8:45 AM
Proposed Peace River plant will cost $9.4B to build, forum hears
EDMONTON — Alberta needs to find alternatives to coal-fired power generation plants, and nuclear power can be part of the mix, a forum heard Sunday.
Fossil fuels are not sustainable environmentally, especially coal which is a major greenhouse gas emitter, said James Lin, co-author of a report on nuclear power in Alberta produced by the Environmental Research and Studies Centre at the University of Alberta.
About 50 people attended the forum at the U of A's Myer Horowitz Theatre, a followup to the report's release earlier this month.
Lin, an economics doctoral student, said nuclear plants produce no greenhouse gases, but are very expensive to build.
The plant planned for Peace River by Bruce Power will cost at least $9.4 billion and construction will take up to seven years, Lin said.
"From a strictly economic point of view coal is still more viable, without the environmental concerns," he said. "We need to make nuclear power profitable, and one way is to make coal more expensive through a quota, carbon tax or cap-and-trade."
The economic downside to nuclear power is the uncertainty of construction costs over a long timeline, as well as possible energy demand and price fluctuations, Lin said.
Tim Weis, director of renewable energy at the environmentally focused Pembina Institute, said nuclear power appeared on the radar here because coal is such an problem.
But the cost of nuclear plants is constantly underestimated, he said.
Ontario has shut down all its nuclear plant rebuilding projects for the time being because costs have doubled.
He said the billions of dollars the federal government has put into nuclear power over the years could have been used to develop renewable energy sources such as wind power.
"Germany, which has the same electricity demand as Canada, now produces 15 per cent of its power through renewables, mostly wind. And we can do it in Alberta."
"We can fill the electricity gap without nuclear power or more coal."
MORE:
[ http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technolo ... story.html ]
=========================
4. CAN CARBON-CAPTURE MOVE US TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY? – Dr. Jim Harding
Saskatchewan Sustainability Published in R-Town News on January 22, 2010
Saskatchewan is a pioneer in carbon capture and storage (CCS) and the Sask Party government thinks this is a win-win-win: good for the economy, for the oil industry and for reducing carbon emissions. How can anything be so good? There is an international CCS consortium in Iceland and the world’s largest user of coal, China, has several test projects. With 50% of its electricity coming from coal plants, the U.S. has a few projects, notably the country’s first commercial one at the large, 1,300-MW Mountaineer coal plant at New Haven. Carbon-laden coal plants are on the short list of things that need replacing to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs). But Is CCS a good bet to do this?
WHAT IS CARBON CAPTURE & STORAGE
Three methods are being explored. First is the chilled ammonia technology in place at New Haven that uses ammonia carbonate to pull CO2 out of exhaust gases. Second is burning coal in pure oxygen to produce a CO2 rich emissions stream, which Sask Power has considered. And the third siphons off the CO2 made during the gasification of coal. All are highly experimental and very costly. The Department of Energy (DOE) claims there is geologic room for 3.9 trillion tons of C02 in the U.S. underground, more than enough to handle the 3.2 billion tons emitted by industry yearly. Meanwhile an Ohio evaluation found rock formations stored less C02 than predicted. The chemistry and geology is apparently not as simple as the industrial experts claim.
Is it ever? Is this the same “trust us…take a leap of faith with industry” that we have heard about nuclear waste storage to no avail for over three generations? While one-half million tons of C02 may get injected into rocks 8,000 feet below the New Haven plant over the next five years, this only constitutes 2% of the plant’s CO2. The November 2009 Scientific American says the CCS technology at New Haven cost $73 million upfront and American Electric Power has asked for $334 million in federal stimulus, which is only one-half of the cost of removing 20% of the plants CO2. What about the other 80%?
The industry claims $1 billion will build state of the art plants, but we should be skeptical, for that is what the nuclear industry also said, until independent assessment showed it to be three-times the industry figure. The U.S.’s DOE has estimated that to get 90% CCS using amine scrubbers would double the cost of coal-fired electricity, from $63 to $114 per megawatt hour (mWh). Meanwhile Stanford researchers found that “clean coal” did the worst, followed by bio-fuels and nuclear, and wind did the best, when comparing the carbon footrpint of all alternative fuels, including electricity, used for transportation. “Clean coal” is a contradiction in terms. And even without doubling the costs of coal with CCS, wind is already competitive with new coal plants.
ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS REMAIN
What if the coal industry could reduce most CO2 by sequestering it safely underground? There’s three “what ifs” in this: if the technology works, if it is economic, and if it can be applied safely. And even if all were resolved, the direct ecological impacts of coal mining would continue. Strip mining would continue. Mountain tops of coal would continue to be removed and watersheds and biodiversity wrecked. The residual toxic fly ash would still come from the coal plants, and the risks of geyser-like releases of underground gases would remain.
In their rush for cake-and-eat-it tech-fixes, governments are proceeding without clarity about who owns the pore spaces in the rock or who assumes liability for accidents. Furthermore, no one is talking about the possibility of any full-scale CCS installations in coal plants before 2015, and possible before 2025, which is far too late to start to reduce absolute levels of GHGs to stop climate change from escalating beyond our control.
So is Saskatchewan pioneering sustainability by embracing CCS? Just because there’s lots of coal in southern Saskatchewan doesn’t mean we have to find some way to justify using it. Just because there is some oil left in the ground doesn’t mean we have to extract it. Value-adding at any cost is not good ecological economics. We have plenty of unused wind, sun and water in the province. And this does not require a toxic fuel. So why not use this?
SHORT-TERM MOTIVATION
In February’s Sasquatch Professor Wilson says CCS emissions “are pretty well non-toxic” and that a higher environmental return on investment comes from CCS than, say, moving to part-electric cars. This is very debatable. But as co-founder of the first CCS commercial project, started near Weyburn in 2007, the director of the International Test Centre at the University of Regina may have an axe to grind. The economic motivation for this project wasn’t primarily GHG reductions but the ability to increase production by two-thirds, or 18,000 barrels per day, in the oilfield that the CO2 is pumped into. With this oil-recovery success the Harper government of course allocated $650 million for CCS research. The agreement signed by Premier Wall and Montana’s Governor for a cross-border CCS project also has more to do with maintaining the lucrative fossil-fuel industry than with GHG reductions.
Saskatchewan presently gets half of its electricity from coal and has the highest per capita GHG emissions in Canada and the second-highest of any jurisdiction on the planet. Is it any accident that it is embracing CCS when it can be used to increase private oil production with public financing, to maintain coal plants and perhaps to use coal to produce lucrative bio-fuels? All, of course, with environmental promotions! Canada presently ranks first among the G8 countries for increased GHGs emissions. Is it any wonder that the Harper government treats CCS as a way to manage the politics of the climate crisis? If we want to get ~ beyond environmental optics we will have to do better.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies.
His website: http://jimharding.brinkster.netwebsite
~ ~ ~ ~
Previous articles at: viewtopic.php?p=1541#1541
==========================
5. Moody's weighs in on power pact
http://www.ibew37.com/newsItem.php?NewsID=121
Posted November 04 2009
Rob Linke, Telegraph Journal OTTAWA - Published November 4th, 2009
Hydro-Quebec's $4.75-billion proposed purchase of NB Power would have no impact on New Brunswick's burden of net debt and would not be expected to change its credit rating, Moody's Investors Service said Tuesday.
Moody's is now the third credit rating agency to conclude the proposed transaction will not have a direct impact in improving the province's credit rating.
Both DBRS and Standard & Poor's drew the same conclusion last week shortly after the Oct. 29 announcement of the pact by Premier Shawn Graham and Quebec Premier Jean Charest.
The proposed purchase price will mean NB Power's debt will be erased.
Graham has stressed erasing what he called a "crippling" debt as one of the agreement's biggest benefits.
But any erasing of NB Power's debt isn't going to have any immediate impact on the province's creditworthiness, according to Moody's.
NB Power's debt - although guaranteed by the provincial government - is excluded from Moody's calculation of the province's net debt.
That's because NB Power's debt is considered self-supporting - it is repaid from the money collected from the utility's customers, not from government coffers.
DBRS and Standard & Poor's treat NB Power's debt the same way.
Moody's says the impact of the proposed deal is "potentially a credit positive, but uncertainties remain."
The uncertainties include the near-term risk related to the behind-schedule, over-budget refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear plant.
Moody's already took into account those risks assumed by NB Power in fixing its rating at Aa2 in August, but "uncertainties still surround the exact cost of the delays and how these will be financed prior to transferring the refurbished (plant) to Hydro-Quebec."
Under the terms of the agreement, the Quebec utility does not take control of the Lepreau plant until the plant is up and running and tested.
MORE:
[ http://www.ibew37.com/newsItem.php?NewsID=121 ]
==============================
6. Obama to boost US nuclear power industry - Possible shift to re-use spent fuel rather than dumping
[ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/01 ... uke_plans/ ]
By Lewis Page Posted in Physics, 1st February 2010 10:53 GMT
President Obama has moved to boost the US nuclear power industry, proposing massive government loan guarantees for construction of new stations and setting up a panel to sort out nuclear waste policy.
The New York Times reports that the White House will include $54bn of loan guarantees in the 2011 budget request to Congress, up from $18.5bn. The idea is to provide investors with enough certainty to move ahead and build new power stations.
At the same time, Obama's energy secretary Steven Chu announced the appointment of a new commission on nuclear waste, hinting that at least some waste might be re-used as fuel in the future rather than being put into long-term storage.
In the early days of nuclear power it was assumed that spent fuel would be reprocessed and reused, because it was thought that uranium was so rare that no other plan could make sense. In the event, however, uranium turned out to be more common than expected. Some nations undertook reprocessing activities anyway, but new fuel has so far remained cheap enough that generally these have been commercially marginal - though perhaps worthwhile from the viewpoint of national weapons programmes.
The USA has never reprocessed its powerplant wastes for a different reason: because doing so creates material with weapons potential. The US government has considered that it's better to have a large waste stockpile than create more weapons-grade material than required and risk it falling into the wrong hands before being used.
MORE:
[ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/01 ... uke_plans/ ]
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
COMMENT: Dr. Dale Dewar: (with permission. Ed.)
On Feb 1, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Dale Dewar wrote:
According to speakers on the Obama administration's strategic plans at the recent Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Obama has to offer an olive branch to the nuclear industry in order to advance abolition of nuclear weapons. That there was absolutely no alternative for him.
Much is also made about the military spending to which he has signed, but, according to Dr. C. S. Elion Kang, PhD (US Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy and Negotiation in the Bureau of International Security and Denuclearization), close examination reveals that much of this actually goes to protection of nuclear weapons and planning programs for conversion.
Apparently he does have a lot of very good people close to him in his administration but it seems that there is not enough support even amongst the Democrats themselves.
Dale Dewar, MD, FCFP
Executive Director,
Physicians for Global Survival
http://www.pgs.ca
==============================
7. Will Obama Guarantee a New Reactor War?
[ http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/30-1 ]
Published on Saturday, January 30, 2010 by CommonDreams.org by Harvey Wasserman
Amidst utter chaos in the atomic reactor industry, Team Obama is poised to vastly expand a bitterly contested loan guarantee program that may cost far more than expected, both financially and politically.
The long-stalled, much-hyped "Renaissance" in atomic power has failed to find private financing. New construction projects are opposed for financial reasons by fiscal conservatives such as the Heritage Foundation and National Taxpayers Union, and by a national grassroots safe energy campaign [1] that has already beaten such loan guarantees three times.
New reactor designs are being challenged by regulators in both the US and Europe. Key projects, new and old, are engulfed in political/financial uproars in Florida, Texas, Maryland, Vermont, New Jersey and elsewhere.
And 53 years after the opening of the first commercial reactor at Shippingport, Pennsylvania, Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu is now convening a "Blue Ribbon" commission on managing radioactive waste, for which the industry still has no solution. Though stacked with reactor advocates, the commission may certify the death certificate for Nevada's failed Yucca Mountain dump.
MORE:
[ http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/30-1 ]
========================
8. Why Is Obama Trying to Prop Up a Doomed 'Nuclear Renaissance'?
[ http://www.alternet.org/story/145493/wh ... age=entire ]
Obama is poised to vastly expand a bitterly contested nuclear loan guarantee program that may cost far more than expected, both financially and politically. February 1, 2010
Amidst utter chaos in the atomic reactor industry, Team Obama is poised to vastly expand a bitterly contested loan guarantee program that may cost far more than expected, both financially and politically.
The long-stalled, much-hyped "Renaissance" in atomic power has failed to find private financing. New construction projects are opposed for financial reasons by fiscal conservatives such as the Heritage Foundation and National Taxpayers Union, and by a national grassroots safe energy campaign that has already beaten such loan guarantees three times.
New reactor designs are being challenged by regulators in both the US and Europe. Key projects, new and old, are engulfed in political/financial uproars in Florida, Texas, Maryland, Vermont, New Jersey and elsewhere.
And 53 years after the opening of the first commercial reactor at Shippingport, Pennsylvania, Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu is now convening a "Blue Ribbon" commission on managing radioactive waste, for which the industry still has no solution. Though stacked with reactor advocates, the commission may certify the death certificate for Nevada's failed Yucca Mountain dump.
In 2005 George W. Bush's Energy Bill embraced appropriations for an $18.5 billion loan guarantee program, which the Obama administration now may want to triple. But the DOE has been unable to minister to a chaotic industry in no shape to proceed with new reactor construction. As many as five government agencies are negotiating over interest rates, accountability, capital sourcing, scoring, potential default and accident liability, design flaws and other fiscal, procedural and regulatory issues, any or all of which could wind up in the courts.
In 2007 a national grassroots uprising helped kill a proposed addition of $50 billion in guarantees, then beat them twice again.
When Obama endorsed "safe, clean nuclear power plants" and "clean coal" in this year's State of the Union, more than 10,000 MoveOn.org members slammed that as the worst moment of the speech.
MORE:
[ http://www.alternet.org/story/145493/wh ... age=entire ]
=====================
9. Environmental Roundup: February 2, 2010
Obama sets 2010 energy priorities
President Obama unveiled his 2010 energy and climate change agenda in his State of the Union address last week, and then got more specific in the budget proposal he released yesterday.
There are pieces of President Obama's plan that he can be proud of, but there are also areas in which he is moving in the wrong direction.
The good: The president's proposal would end $36 billion in taxpayer giveaways to the oil and gas industries and other fossil fuel polluters - something Friends of the Earth has been fighting for for more than a decade. (To see where some of the cuts can be made, view our summer 2008 analysis (pdf).)
The proposal also includes about $5 billion of smart new investments in clean energy technologies.
The bad: The president's budget would make up to $54 billion available for a bailout of the nuclear industry if it defaults on loans for new reactor projects. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts more than 50 percent of such projects will result in defaults. There are far better ways to spend this money.
The ugly: In his State of the Union address, the president called nuclear, coal, offshore drilling and biofuels "clean." They aren't. (See our statement responding to the address.)
========================
10. Vt nuke plant leaks renew debate over aging plants
[ http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermon ... ng_plants/ ]
By Dave Gram Associated Press Writer / February 1, 2010
MONTPELIER, Vt.—Radioactive tritium, a carcinogen discovered in potentially dangerous levels in groundwater at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, has now tainted at least 27 of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors -- raising concerns about how it is escaping from the aging nuclear plants.
The leaks -- many from deteriorating underground pipes -- come as the nuclear industry is seeking and obtaining federal license renewals, casting itself as a clean-green alternative to power plants that burn fossil fuels.
Tritium, found in nature in tiny amounts and a product of nuclear fission, has been linked to cancer if ingested, inhaled or absorbed through the skin in large amounts.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Monday that new tests at a monitoring well on Vermont Yankee's site in Vernon registered 70,500 picocuries per liter, more than three times the federal safety standard of 20,000 picocuries per liter.
MORE:
[ http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermon ... ng_plants/ ]
==========================
11. Iraq to sue US, Britain over depleted uranium bombs (CAUTION: PHOTO!)
[ http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=11 ... =351020201 ]
Mon, 01 Feb 2010 09:14:21 GMT
Iraq's Ministry for Human Rights will file a lawsuit against Britain and the US over their use of depleted uranium bombs in Iraq, an Iraqi minister says.
Iraq's Minister of Human Rights, Wijdan Mikhail Salim, told Assabah newspaper that the lawsuit will be launched based on reports from the Iraqi ministries of science and the environment.
According to the reports, during the first year of the US and British invasion of Iraq, both countries had repeatedly used bombs containing depleted uranium.
According to Iraqi military experts, the US and Britain bombed the country with nearly 2,000 tons of depleted uranium bombs during the early years of the Iraq war.
Atomic radiation has increased the number of babies born with defects in the southern provinces of Iraq.
MORE:
[ http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=11 ... =351020201 ]
==========================
12. No Nukes News - Feb. 1, 2010
Authorizing construction of new nuclear reactors without first constructing a radioactive waste disposal facility is like authorizing construction of a new Sears Tower without bathrooms. - Dave Kraft, director of Nuclear Energy Information Service.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Help with distro!
As you know the province of Ontario has asked the federal gov’t to subsidize the purchase of 2 new nuclear reactors to be built at Darlington. We don’t think federal taxpayers in Halifax, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Parry Sound or Montreal should pay for our costly electrical supply. And if the feds don’t subsidy the purchase, it’ll die on the drawing board!
Would you consider ordering free copies of this leaflet http://ontariosgreenfuture.ca/CostlyNukes_12_09.pdf and distributing it to your friends around the country? I’ll mail you multiple copies for FREE. They contain postcards to Harper and Ignatieff saying essentially “don’t subsidize ON’s nukes”. Thanks for your help getting these out across the country. Send me your address and I’ll mail them out to you pronto.
Thanks…
angela@cleanairalliance.org
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario green energy deal: Sellout or sweet deal?
Holy Samsung. The green energy dream is not just waking up, it's moving in. Who knew it would have a brand name and be an immigrant from Korea? Has the provincial government sold our renewable soul to some foreign demon?...
The problem, he says, is that the government has placed a de facto cap on the development of green energy by its 2006 decision to set aside the majority of the space for nukes. "The next and best step for Ontario is to replace the Pickering B nuclear station -- just 10 per cent of Ontario's generation -- with green energy when it comes offline in 2016," he says. "The potential is obvious, and it's way cheaper than building a new nuke."
[ http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/2010/01 ... sweet-deal ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
Noise from roads is more disruptive to people's lives than that from wind turbines
according to the president of the Institute Of Acoustics (IOA)
"For every person who might be annoyed by wind farms, there are hundreds more annoyed by roads.”
[ http://www.planningresource.co.uk/bulle ... lyBulletin ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce A Unit 1 Alpha Contamination
On January 7, 2010, Bruce Power informed the CNSC of the discovery of alpha contamination in Bruce A Unit 1.
[ http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/medi ... 1_2010.cfm ]
Background:
Alpha radiation is a non-penetrating form of radiation which is harmless outside the body, but which is at least 20 times more harmful (per unit of energy deposited) than penetrating gamma radiation, once it is inside the body and in contact with living cells. See [ http://ccnr.org/alpha_in_lung.html ]
Once inhaled, or absorbed through the gut, these radioactive elements can remain lodged in the body for protracted periods of time, constantly irradiating the sensitive cells.
Although there are regulatory limits on the amount of these alpha-emitting materials allowed in the body, there is no such thing as a safe dose, as even small exposures are capable of causing cancer or other diseases.
- Gordon Edwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Conference urges Canada to press policies against nuclear weapons
Anti-nuclear groups including Project Ploughshares and the Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons want Prime Minister Stephen Harper to speak out on disarmament. They say Canada should press NATO to review its nuclear strategies and urge the removal of tactical nuclear weapons from Europe.
[ http://www.metronews.ca/ottawa/canada/a ... ar-weapons ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
UK new nuclear build will not get government subsidies
The British government will not use taxpayers’ money to subsidize the construction of new nuclear power plants.
In an online question and answer session with ‘The Guardian’ newspaper, Lord Hunt said the government had made it “absolutely clear” that the cost of new nuclear power plants must be met in full by the commercial companies themselves, including the cost of decommissioning and waste management.
http://theenergycollective.com/TheEnerg ... tive/57202
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tell President Obama: Nuclear Power is Neither Safe Nor Clean
If you were watching the State of the Union address, I'm sure you were as appalled as I was when President Obama suddenly spoke in support of "safe, clean nuclear power" (not to mention support for offshore oil drilling and "clean" coal).
Politically, Obama likely was simply parroting the effort being led by Sens. John Kerry, Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham to gain support for a climate bill by adding massive subsidies for nuclear power, offshore oil and "clean" coal. But recycling George W. Bush energy talking points is no way to solve the climate crisis or develop a sustainable energy policy.
Please tell President Obama that he's wrong: nuclear power is neither safe nor clean.
[ http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/550 ... n_KEY=1677 ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. 'nuclear renaissance' had roots in Bush-Cheney
The "nuclear renaissance," hailed in many headlines and speeches over the last few years, started under President George W. Bush.
Within months after he took office in 2001, an internal briefing paper for Vice President Dick Cheney noted that expanding the use of nuclear power would be "a bold step" that could help lower carbon-dioxide emissions.
From 2002 through 2007, nuclear programs got $6.2 billion for research and development, up 59%.
[ http://www.theolympian.com/election/pre ... 06054.html ]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Iraq littered with high levels of nuclear and dioxin contamination, study finds
• Greater rates of cancer and birth defects near sites
• Depleted uranium among poisons revealed in report
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/22/
iraq-nuclear-contaminated-sites
----------------------------------------------------------------
Germany's waste removal decision
Thousands of barrels are to be removed from Germany's Asse radioactive waste disposal facility, a salt dome which has proven unstable.
It was decided to use Asse in the 1960s and 1970s but this is seen as a licensing failure: The complex is in the upper portions of the salt, which are now unstable and increasingly allowing the ingress of groundwater. Ultimately this would be expected to erode waste canisters and allow contamination of groundwater.
While deciding on removal to the surface, the BfS warned that none of its options were optimal and all were uncertain.
[ http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_Ge ... 01101.html ]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario's wind power snags lamented
Wind turbines offshore in the Great Lakes have the potential to generate a huge chunk of Ontario's power, but a more streamlined approval process is needed if the offshore industry's potential is to be achieved.
That's the conclusion of a report from wind developer Trillium Power Wind Corp., which calculates that the Ontario government has received applications for offshore projects that would generate almost 21,000 megawatts of power, if they all came to fruition.
[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le1435873/ ]
Lakes wind could power Ontario: report
Offshore turbines would spawn huge industry that has potential of outpacing entrenched generators such as nuclear, hydro, developer says
[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le1435455/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Power Use Rises 39% In 2009
The use of wind power in America rose 39% last year according to a report from American Wind Energy Association cited in The New York Times. “The amount of capacity added last year, 9,900 megawatts, was the largest on record,” the report says.
[ http://247wallst.com/2010/01/26/wind-po ... 9-in-2009/ ]
[ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/busin ... ?th&emc=th ]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Grassroots Communities Mining Mini-Grant Program
NEXT DEADLINE: FEBRUARY 1, 2010
The goal of the Mining Mini-grants Program is to support and enhance the capacity building efforts of mining-impacted communities in the U.S. and Canada to assure that mining projects do not adversely affect human, cultural, and the ecological health of communities.
The applicant must be a grassroots or indigenous community program with limited funds that have demonstrated the capacity to successfully carry out the project. Individual grants will not exceed $3,000 U.S. and cannot be used for general programmatic or operating expenses.
Sponsored by: Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN) and Western Mining Action Network (WMAN)
For more info and applications: Sarah Keeney, WMAN Network Coordinator at (503) 327-8625 ~ sarahekeeney@comcast.net or Simone Senogles, Indigenous Environmental Network, (218) 751-4967 ~ simone@ienearth.org.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Martin, Climate and Energy Coordinator of Greenpeace Canada will present a Report back on the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen - Toronto
Wednesday, February 3, 7 PM
Medical Sciences Building, 1 King’s College Circle, Room 2172 University of Toronto Campus
Dave Martin has 25 years of experience working in the Canadian non-profit sector on energy-related issues, including conservation, renewable technologies, nuclear power, nuclear weapons proliferation and climate change.
He has been a researcher, policy analyst and campaigner for several environmental groups. He has spoken widely on energy issues and has served as a consultant in various regulatory proceedings.
He was Research Director for the former Nuclear Awareness Project from 1996 to 2000, and was a policy advisor on energy issues for Sierra Club Canada from 2000 to 2004. Since July 2004, Dave has been Climate and Energy Coordinator for Greenpeace Canada.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Harper has had a change of heart about global finance – watch this 1 minute video for details:
[ http://www.we-forum.org/en/events/Annua ... rper.shtml ]
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, speaks about the climate crisis and the issue of responsibility
Brought to you by the Yes Men. http://theyesmen.org/
And if you’re in Toronto, catch the Yes Men Fix the World:
Canada Square (Cineplex), 2190 Yonge St. (at Eglinton Ave. W.)
Fri: 4:20, 6:45, 9:15
Sat, Sun: 2:00, 4:20, 6:45, 9:15
Mon, Tue, Wed, Thu: 4:20, 6:45, 9:15 p.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff, Outreach Director
Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402, Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
http://www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
http://www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
=======================
13. Deputy PM Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega, tries to "appease" the debate on dumping nuclear waste
[ http://www.barcelonareporter.com/index. ... _tries_to_
appease_the_debate_on_/ ]
Monday, February 1, 2010
Noting that it is a "safe choice" that is "supported" by experts from the Nuclear Safety Council and the experience of some European countries Deputy PM Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega, tries to "appease" the debate on dumping nuclear waste
"It's a debate that we face with the greatest intellectual serenity and it is a good viable alternative. The eventual place where the re-processing plant is instaled will create further opportunities for economic revival and revitalization of the economy," De la Vega noted in the press conference after the Council of Ministers.
Noting that it is a "safe choice" that is "supported" by experts from the Nuclear Safety Council and the experience of some European countries, she reminded everyone that the deadline for submitting nominations concludes tonight.
MORE:
[ http://www.barcelonareporter.com/index. ... _tries_to_
appease_the_debate_on_/ ]
=====================
14. The Fateful Geological Prize Called Haiti
[ http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=17287 ]
By F. William Engdahl Global Research, January 30, 2010
President becomes UN Special Envoy to earthquake-stricken Haiti.
A born-again neo-conservative US business wheeler-dealer preacher claims Haitians are condemned for making a literal ‘pact with the Devil.’
Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, Bolivian, French and Swiss rescue organizations accuse the US military of refusing landing rights to planes bearing necessary medicines and urgently needed potable water to the millions of Haitians stricken, injured and homeless.
Behind the smoke, rubble and unending drama of human tragedy in the hapless Caribbean country, a drama is in full play for control of what geophysicists believe may be one of the worlds richest zones for hydrocarbons-oil and gas outside the Middle East, possibly orders of magnitude greater than that of nearby Venezuela.
Haiti, and the larger island of Hispaniola of which it is a part, has the geological fate that it straddles one of the worlds most active geological zones, where the deepwater plates of three huge structures relentlessly rub against one anotherthe intersection of the North American, South American and Caribbean tectonic plates. Below the ocean and the waters of the Caribbean, these plates consist of an oceanic crust some 3 to 6 miles thick, floating atop an adjacent mantle. Haiti also lies at the edge of the region known as the Bermuda Triangle, a vast area in the Caribbean subject to bizarre and unexplained disturbances.
This vast mass of underwater plates are in constant motion, rubbing against each other along lines analogous to cracks in a broken porcelain vase that has been reglued. The earths tectonic plates typically move at a rate 50 to 100 mm annually in relation to one another, and are the origin of earthquakes and of volcanoes. The regions of convergence of such plates are also areas where vast volumes of oil and gas can be pushed upwards from the Earths mantle. The geophysics surrounding the convergence of the three plates that run more or less directly beneath Port-au-Prince make the region prone to earthquakes such as the one that struck Haiti with devastating ferocity on January 12.
A relevant Texas geological project
Leaving aside the relevant question of how well in advance the Pentagon and US scientists knew the quake was about to occur, and what Pentagon plans were being laid before January 12, another issue emerges around the events in Haiti that might help explain the bizarre behavior to date of the major rescue playersthe United States, France and Canada. Aside from being prone to violent earthquakes, Haiti also happens to lie in a zone that, due to the unusual geographical intersection of its three tectonic plates, might well be straddling one of the worlds largest unexplored zones of oil and gas, as well as of valuable rare strategic minerals.
MORE: [ http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=17287 ]
===================
15. Everybody wants supplies as nuclear power comes roaring back
[ http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/b ... 009629.ece ]
January 31, 2010
It’s an odd place for a group of Frenchmen to pitch a tent city.
Bakouma is one of the deepest, darkest corners of African jungle. From Bangui, the capital of the land-locked Central African Republic, it takes days to navigate the 800km of dirt track to this patch of virgin forest in the middle of the continent. Usually they go by light aircraft to a nearby landing strip. Most of the 160 or so jungle dwellers are scientists but they are not there to count butterflies. They are drawing up plans for a uranium mine. Areva, France’s state-owned nuclear giant, is behind the
project. It hopes to begin clearing forest next year after the government approves its plan.
Bakouma is not an isolated case. It’s just one example of a silent landgrab unfolding around the globe. After decades as a forgotten commodity, uranium, the radioactive element used as the primary fuel for nuclear power, is hot property again. Agents for companies, many of them government-controlled, are fanning out across the globe to gain access to the powdery, radioactive ore.
The scramble has been set off by the comeback of nuclear power. In the past couple of years countries that for decades had shunned it as an expensive, pariah technology have embraced it anew. Britain is leading the charge. The government envisages a new generation of reactors to replace the rickety old stations that will be retired in the coming years. The renaissance has taken hold elsewhere, from America to the Middle East and China.
For some, the resulting uranium rush is worrying. Rianne Teule, a nuclear campaigner at Greenpeace, said: “A lot of new countries in Africa are opening up to uranium mining but it is non-African companies that are exploiting the resource — Chinese, Canadian and French firms. It’s a whole new phase of colonialism.” It’s also a serious business. As with oil, companies and governments are seeking to ensure supplies of a fuel that will play an increasing role as economies move away from traditional fossil-fuelled power.
=======================
16. ARMZ and Cameco are negotiating joint projects in Australia and Africa
http://www.minatom.ru/en/news/17391_01.10.2009
01.10.2009 // Interfax
Atomredmetzoloto (ARMZ) and Cameco (Canada) are negotiating joint uranium prospecting projects in Australia and Africa, Vice President of ARMZ Alexander Boytsov said during a press-conference in Moscow on Thursday.
The companies have set up two prospecting JVs in Canada and Russia but the Russian JV (Karhu) has failed to start up because of licensing obstacles. “Now Cameco is offering joint projects in other countries,” Boytsov said.
However, ARMZ is not going to give up the Karhu project. “We will search for other possibilities. Today, ARMZ and Cameco have outlined their priorities – Australia and Africa. But we are not going to participate in existing enterprises. We are negotiating prospecting projects,” Boytsov said.
He said that ARMZ had a uranium prospecting project in Namibia and the company was negotiating with local companies about other possibilities. “We are considering the possibility of participating in big companies (in Namibia) that are at stages close to mining: when there are four or less years left before the start of mining activities.”
ARMZ is also negotiating an asset exchange deal with Uranium One. ARMZ hopes to get an almost 20% stake in that company. Boytsov confirmed that the company was planning to finalize the deal by mid Dec 2009. “We need a number of permissions – particularly, by the Canadian and Kazakh authorities as both parties have assets in Kazakhstan. We hope to get the permissions even earlier than planned,” Boytsov said.
NUKE NEWS
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 02.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:21 am
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 05.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:22 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 05.10
Compilation:
1. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 – Saskatoon
2. EnerGuide and ecoENERGY Retrofit - February 24, 2010 - Regina
3. Lunch and Learn – Solar Technology in Building – Feb. 26, 2010 - Saskatoon
4. ACTION ALERT: We need at least 5000 letters sent BEFORE FEB. 28TH. – CNANW
5. The Planning of War Behind Closed Doors
6. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker
7. Boom in nuclear energy unlikely: Expert
8. Radiation Risk and Scientific Method: Learning from the Azande?
9. Much higher tritium levels found at nuclear plant
10. Government Admits Targeting Anti-Nuclear Signs – Press Release
11. Chernobyl: Leaking radiation and sucking up Canadian money
12. UPDATE: Nuclear Information and Resource Service – Feb. 04.10
13. We should not put our money into Obama's misguided nuclear dementia.
14. GLOBE 2010 - 11th Biennial Conference & Trade Fair on Business & the Environment March 24-26, 2010, Vancouver Convention Centre
=============================
1. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 - Saskatoon
Where: 7 PM, J.S. Wood Library, 1801 Lansdowne Ave.
Join guest speaker Peter Prebble, Director of Energy and Water Policy for the Saskatchewan Environmental Society, as he reviews the enormous consequences of climate change, the long lived nature of greenhouse gases, and the outcome of the international negotiations at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. In that global context, he will then examine plans to develop an oil sands industry in Saskatchewan and argue for a much more cautious approach than the Saskatchewan government has taken to date. Saskatchewan should learn from Alberta’s serious mistakes and be prepared to reject unsustainable oil sands proposals. The second half of Peter’s presentation will outline concrete steps Saskatchewan can take to sharply reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and create green jobs based on a renewable energy future. Peter will make the case for major Saskatchewan investments in energy efficiency, wind power, small scale hydro, co-generation of electricity, biomass development and solar energy. He will propose a new set of public policies aimed at building a renewable energy society in Saskatchewan. The policy proposals would bring sweeping and exciting change to Saskatchewan. For more information phone 665-1915.
======================
2. EnerGuide and ecoENERGY Retrofit - February 24, 2010 - Regina
Where: 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm, Glen Elm Library
Is winter causing your energy costs to soar! Meet a SaskEnergy representative who will explain the Saskatchewan EnerGuide for Houses and federal ecoENERGY Retrofit programs being offered by the Government of Saskatchewan and Natural Resources Canada. Also, there will be tips on what you can do to make your home more energy efficient. Pre-register by calling 777-6080.
=============================
3. Lunch and Learn – Solar Technology in Building – Feb. 26, 2010 - Saskatoon
Where: Green bag lunch & learn (free): 12:15pm to 1:00pm, (short presentations from all 3 speakers: bring your own lunch), Afternoon teaching session: 1:00pm to 3:00pm. University of Saskatchewan School of Education, studio A (downstairs), University of Regina School of Education, room 158 (sites connected by videoconference facilities)
Speakers: Dr ROB DUMONT, KEN KELLN (Kelln Solar), KELLY WINDER (SRC)
Solar design for buildings - design principles, good practice, available grants
Cost: non-members $30, members $20, students $10). Event presented by Canada Green Building Council SK Chapter
Register now at http://www.picatic.com/ticket/event691560
For more information go to http://www.cagbc.org/chapters/saskatche ... /index.php
===================================
4. ACTION ALERT: We need at least 5000 letters sent BEFORE FEB. 28TH. - CNANW
Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
http://web.net/~cnanw/donate_f.htm
CANADIAN ACTION TOWARD THE ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS DEPENDS ON YOU!
PLEASE SHARE THIS EMAIL WITH ALL APPROPRIATE LISTSERVES,
YOUR FAMILY, FRIENDS, EVERYONE YOU KNOW!
= = = = = =
Dear Friends,
Are you concerned about the threat of nuclear weapons use?
Biological and chemical weapons are banned.
We believe nuclear weapons - threatening thousands of lives and our environment with even a small exchange - should be banned too.
We now have an extremely rare opportunity for progress.
President Obama has called for a Nuclear Weapons-Free World and he has the support of many international leaders.
The Government of Canada can speak out at three important events this year:
• during the ongoing review of the NATO Strategic Concept
(this only occurs once every 10 years)
• at the NonProliferation Treaty Review Conference in May
(this only occurs once every 5 years)
• and during the G8 Summit.
We ask you to send emails that first welcome Canada’s ongoing support for an effective Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and for the Government’s efforts to improve its effectiveness through important institutional reforms.
Then please urge the Government of Canada:
a) to reaffirm Canada's traditional commitment to a world without nuclear weapons,
b) to support the call for an end to nuclear weapons reliance in NATO and the removal of US nuclear weapons in Europe,
c) to support the proposal for preparatory work on a nuclear weapons convention and to work on the verification requirements for nuclear disarmament.
Please send your emails before the end of February to:
Prime Minister Harper at <HarpeS@parl.gc.ca>
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon <CannoL@parl.gc.ca>
Ambassador to NATO <Robert.McRae@international.gc.ca>
Ambassador for Disarmament c/o <Jonathan.Tan@internatonal.gc.ca>
Prefer to mail your letters?
Letters to the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs
can be mailed postage-free to:
House of Commons, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0A6.
Letters to the Ambassadors can be mailed to:
Jonathan Tan, Senior Policy Officer | Agent principal des politiques
Non-Proliferation and Disarmament | Direction de la non-prolifération et du désarmement
Fax: 613-944-1835
125 Sussex Drive,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0G2
For information on the current Canadian context, see this article by Doug Roche and Ernie Regehr:
http://www.cigionline.org/blogs/2010/2/ ... liferation
For further information please go to
http://www.abolishnuclearweapons.ca
We need at least 5000 letters sent - so please share this with your family and friends.
Let's support the international call for a nuclear weapons-free world!
Bev Delong
Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
===================
5. The Planning of War Behind Closed Doors
Brussels, London, Istanbul: A Week Of Western War Councils
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17428
By Rick RozoffGlobal Research, February 5, 2010
Stop NATO: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
The defense chiefs of all 28 NATO nations and an undisclosed number of counterparts from non-Alliance partners gathered in Istanbul, Turkey on February 4 to begin two days of meetings focused on the war in Afghanistan, the withdrawal of military forces from Kosovo in the course of transferring control of security operations to the breakaway province's embryonic army (the Kosovo Security Force) and "the transformation efforts required to best conduct the full range of NATO s agreed missions." [1]
Istanbul was the site of the bloc's 2004 summit which accounted for the largest expansion in its 60-year history - seven new Eastern European nations - and its strengthening military partnerships with thirteen Middle Eastern and African nations under the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.
The Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe Admiral James Stavridis and the top commander of all U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan - soon to reach over 150,000 - General Stanley McChrystal are also in attendance, as are European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton and United Nations High Representative for Afghanistan Kai Eide as well as the defense and interior ministers of Afghanistan.
The meetings follow by a week the International Conference on Afghanistan held in London, which in turn occurred the day after two days of meetings of the NATO Military Committee with the Chiefs of Defense of the military bloc's 28 member states and 35 more from what were described as Troop Contributing Nations; presumably NATO partner nations with troops stationed in the Afghan war theater. In all, the military chiefs of 63 countries.
The U.S.'s McChrystal was present there also as were Israeli Chief of General Staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi and Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. Beforehand the bloc's website reported that "The various meetings will focus on the progress made in ongoing operations and the New Strategic Concept for NATO." [2] That 35 top military commanders from non-NATO countries were present to hear plans for the escalation of what is already the largest war in the world is understandable, as their forces are on the ground as part of a 50-nation plus force under NATO military command.
That the same conference discussed the bloc's 21st century new global military doctrine - former U.S. secretary of state Madeleine Albright delivered an address on the topic - raises the question of how many of the 35 partner states' military chiefs may have joined their 28 NATO colleagues for that phase of discussions. That such a high percentage of the world's leading military commanders attended a two-day affair which deliberated on both the war in South Asia and the expansion of the world's only military bloc's activities even further outside the Euro-Atlantic area (when it has already conducted operations in four continents) confirms that the Afghan war serves more than one purpose for the West. It is the laboratory for strengthening military ties with nations on every inhabited continent and for building the nucleus of and foundation for a potential future world army.
MORE : www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17428
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
German Bundeswehr manual challenges US and UK denials over depleted uranium in Afghanistan
http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/283.html
A classified German Army manual has thrown doubt over US and UK assurances that no depleted uranium munitions have been used in Afghanistan.
21 July 2009 - ICBUW
===================
6. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
deep+thinker/2520409/story.html
BY CASSANDRA KYLE, THE STARPHOENIX FEBRUARY 4, 2010
Cameco Corp. CEO Jerry Grandey has made doubling uranium production a goal of the company
As president and CEO of Cameco Corp., Jerry Grandey is no stranger to spending time in airports.
The Saskatoon-based business leader often jets away to engagements relatively close to home in North America, or as far away as India, where the company recently opened an office.
Last Friday, Grandey spent a few minutes inside the Prince Albert airport. That's where Star Phoenix business reporter Cassandra Kyle asked Cameco's CEO five questions about the company's future.
SP: When would you like to see production begin at Cigar Lake? (Emphasis added. Ed)
JG: Well, I think the answer to that is as soon as possible. We're now down the shaft well over 400 metres and we're getting a glimpse of some of the underground workings. We haven't put our feet down there yet, but from the cage we're able to kind of look around.
But only when we're finally able to walk through the underground workings and see what the condition is from being underwater, now a little over three years, are we going to be able to answer that question.
We're making great progress. There's a lot of innovation, a lot of creativity that goes on up there every day to try and move it forward as fast as we can.
SP: Cameco raised hundreds of millions of dollars (on the market) in 2009. Will the company be announcing any acquisitions soon? (Emphasis added. Ed.)
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
deep+thinker/2520409/story.html
===================
7. Boom in nuclear energy unlikely: Expert
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Boom+nuclear+energy+unlikely+Expert/2523121/story.html
By Mike De Souza, Canwest News Service February 4, 2010 3:12 PM
OTTAWA — An expansion of nuclear facilities and energy sources is unlikely to occur over the next two decades, unless the global community adopts major changes to improve safety and security as well as working to prevent the risk of proliferation, said a new report released on Thursday.
The study, released at Carleton University by an independent think-tank, concluded that the nuclear industry faces too many barriers when compared to other sources of energy.
"The significant constraints, while not insurmountable, are likely to outweigh the drivers," said the report, Nuclear Energy and Global Governance to 2030: An Action Plan. (http://www.cigionline.org/articles/2010 ... igi-report )
“For the vast majority of states, nuclear power will be as elusive as ever."
The report was based on nearly four years of research by a team at the Centre for International Governance Innovation and was written by Dr. Trevor Findlay, the director at Carleton's Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance.
It concluded that the economics and regulatory constraints of developing nuclear power plants were among the biggest barriers for the industry. It also said that alternative forms of energy would be better options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in terms of their feasibility and cost.
"Nuclear energy is not nimble enough to meet the threat of climate change in the short term," the report said. "A nuclear power plant can take a decade of planning, regulatory processes, construction and testing before producing electricity. Cheaper, more quickly deployed alternatives, including energy efficiency, will likely prevail."
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Boom+nuclear+energy+unlikely+Expert/2523121/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
INFO: Trevor Findlay, CIGI Senior Fellow
http://www.cigionline.org/person/trevor-findlay
Director: Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance (CCTC) © 2005-2010
http://www.carleton.ca/cctc/staff.html#trevor
=======================
8. Radiation Risk and Scientific Method: Learning from the Azande?
http://www.greenaudit.org/Azande%20Science.htm
The following text is taken from a presentation made by Chris Busby to the Royal Society on 19 July 2000 as part of their 'scientific' investigation into the possible health effects of depleted uranium weapons.
The full text can be found on the website of the Low Level Radiation Campaign: llrc.org.
The classical exposition of the scientific, or inductive method (originally due to William of Occam) is what is now called Mill’s Canons, the two most important of which are:
· The Canon of Agreement which states that whatever there is in common between the antecedent conditions of a phenomenon can be supposed to be the cause, or related to the cause, of the phenomenon.
· The Canon of Difference which states that the differences in the conditions under which an effect occurs and those under which it does not must be the cause or related to the cause of that effect.
In addition, the method relies upon the Principle of Accumulation which states that scientific knowledge grows additively by the discovery of independent laws, and the Principle of Instance Confirmation, that the degree of belief in the truth of a law is proportional to the number of favourable instances of the law.
Finally to the methods of inductive reasoning we should add considerations of plausibility of mechanism.
These are the basic methods of science [Mill, 1879; Harre, 1985; Papineau, 1996]
Let us first define our question. It is this. What are the health consequences of exposure to novel internal radioisotopes at whole organ dose levels below 2mSv? Because we are looking at battlefield DU, we should add that in this case, although the element is ‘natural’, the exposure is novel, and due to internal sub-micron Uranium Oxide particles embedded in tissue.
Although risks from exposure to high levels of ionizing radiation are generally accepted, since they are fairly immediate and graphic, the situation with regard to low-level exposure is curious. There are now two mutually exclusive models describing the health consequences of exposure to low-level radiation. There is a nuclear establishment one, which is that which is presently used to set legislation on exposures and argue that DU is safe, and a radical one, which is espoused by the anti-nuclear movement and its associated scientists. I show these two models schematically in Fig 2.
MORE: http://www.greenaudit.org/Azande%20Science.htm
=======================
9. Much higher tritium levels found at nuclear plant
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/04/AR2010020403593.html
By Dave Gram, The Associated Press, Thursday, February 4, 2010
MONTPELIER, Vt. -- A radioactive substance recently found in groundwater monitoring wells at a Vermont nuclear plant has turned up again at levels more than nine times those previously reported and more than 37 times higher than a federal safe drinking water
limit, officials said Thursday.
Officials at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, state Health Department and federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission said a newly dug monitoring well at the Vernon reactor turned up a reading of nearly 775,000 picocuries per liter. It was by far the highest reading reported yet for tritium, which has been linked to cancer when ingested in large amounts.
Despite the much higher reading, an NRC spokeswoman said Thursday there was nothing to fear.
"There's not currently, nor is there likely to be, an impact on public health or safety or the environment," the NRC's Diane Screnci said in an interview. She had maintained previously that the Environmental Protection Agency drinking water safety limit of 20,000 picocuries per liter had an abundance of caution built into it.
California's state limit is 50 times lower than the EPA's, 400 picocuries per liter. The National Academy of Sciences said in 2005 that any exposure to ionizing radiation from an isotope like tritium elevates the risk of cancer, though it also said with small exposures, the risk would be low.
News of the new reading came nearly a month after the Jan. 7 announcement that tritium had been discovered in a monitoring well at the Vernon reactor. No source has yet been found.
Plant spokesman Robert Williams said in an e-mail Thursday that the new reading is "good news" because it could indicate plant technicians searching for the leak are zeroing in on a source.
"The good news is that one newly installed well, located just to the east of the plant's condensate water storage tank and some underground piping, appears to be closer to the source because its concentration is 774,825 picocuries per liter," Williams wrote in the e-mail.
But he also said test results can fluctuate with the flow of groundwater through the area being tested. He noted that the well in which contamination was first reported was up over 36,000 picocuries per liter, from 17,000 when first reported. A second well, which showed a reading above about 85,000 picocuries per liter on Tuesday, had dropped below 70,000.
MORE:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/04/AR2010020403593.html
=====================
10. Government Admits Targeting Anti-Nuclear Signs – Press Release
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1545#1545
From: Ent Work
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:35 PM For Immediate Release
Alberta Transportation Admits Nuclear Signs Were Targeted!
Alberta Transportation confirmed they targeted anti-nuclear signs in the Peace River area for removal. The recorded meeting between Regional Director, Wayne Franklin and two anti-nuclear groups made up of farmers from the area was held in Peace River on February 1, 2010. The evidence presented by the Weberville Area Connection and Earth Alternatives could not be denied or dismissed.
Mr. Franklin’s admission was in stark contrast to the denials and obfuscations put forward by other senior staff at Alberta Transportation during three previous meetings in January.
Mr. Franklin was unable to explain why our anti-nuclear signs were removed and other non-conforming signs weren’t. We are still waiting for an explanation for this breach of policy. We provided pictures showing the non-conforming signs they had to walk past to be able to remove the anti-nuclear signs.
Alberta Transportation maintains that it was only coincidence the order to remove our signs was issued the same day Mel Knight announced the nuclear project could proceed. They claim it was also coincidence that they issued an order to remove our anti-nuclear trailer the business-day after we showed up unannounced at Frank Oberle’s office on November 13, 2009.
We don’t believe in this many coincidences. We will be filing FOIP requests to determine if MLA Frank Oberle or other government official corresponded with Alberta Transportation concerning our anti-nuclear signs.
Alberta Transportation was unable to provide statutes defining acceptable messages on signs, although Mr. Franklin did admit there was no difference between a “No To Nuclear” sign and a “No Hunting” sign.
We’ve committed to ongoing dialogue with Mr. Franklin to resolve this issue and the consequences we’ve suffered as a result. A transcript of the February 1, 2010 meeting is available upon request.
In related news, MP Chris Warkentin agreed to meet with the Weberville Area Connection and Earth Alternatives before he returns to Ottawa to hear our concerns about the Federal Government’s handling of the nuclear situation in Peace River to date. Our foremost concern is that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency have met with surrounding First Nations communities to explain the environmental assessment process, yet they refuse to come to the community that will be most affected. Why are we not being extended the same courtesy and rights? - 30 -
Pat McNamara, Weberville Area Connection entwork@hotmail.com
Brent Reese, Earth Alternatives, (780) 836-3796
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
BACKGROUND
On January 6, (2010) five of us met with Gerard Gravel, a senior technologist with 30 years in the Peace River office of Alberta Transportation. He told us that La Prairie Group was ordered to remove all signs on public property but a La Prairie employee told us that they were only ordered to take down “No To Nuclear” (NTN) signs. Indeed, only the anti-nuclear signs were removed. All other signs were left where they were.
Mr. Gravel told us that letters were sent out to owners of all signs on private property that had no permits. We pointed out to him that this was not true as one farmer with two commercial signs on the same fence-line beside a NTN sign only received a letter about his NTN sign. None of them had permits.
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1545#1545
============================
11. Chernobyl: Leaking radiation and sucking up Canadian money
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/
chernobyl-leaking-radiation-and-sucking-up-canadian-money/article1454040/
Thirteen years after Canada and other nations pledged $768-million to render the destroyed nuclear reactor safe, the cost has ballooned to $2-billion and the job still isn't done
Doug Saunders, Globe and Mail, Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Kiev — Almost a quarter-century after its explosion killed hundreds and shocked the world, the Chernobyl nuclear reactor still sits crumbling amid an uninhabitable wasteland in northern Ukraine, still emits surprising amounts of radiation, and still absorbs vast amounts of money.
Much of that money, at least $71-million of it, has come from Canadian taxpayers, intended to pay for a project launched in 1997 under a pledge from leaders of the G-7 countries to enclose the reactor in a permanent, sealed sarcophagus.
It was meant to be finished in eight years and cost $768-million (U.S.), a symbol of a resurgent Ukraine returning to democratic government and an open economy, putting the 1986 disaster permanently in the past.
But in a story of tragic disappointment that exemplifies the web of corruption and distrust that so often ensnares relations between Ukraine and the West, 13 years later the cost of the project has ballooned to almost $2-billion and construction has not even begun.
Canadian officials describe it as a “money sink” that has fallen prey to the worst aspects of Ukraine's failed development, a physical manifestation of the once-wealthy country's political decay.
Later this year, after the G-8 conference in Huntsville, Ont., the Canadian government will be asked to make another pledge, likely in the tens of millions of dollars, in an effort to raise another $200-million to $300-million to get the job done by the end of 2012, before the reactor decays further and poses an even graver danger. While the reactor's original sarcophagus, built in a hurry after the disaster, was recently reinforced, it is a flimsy structure that could collapse, sending a radioactive dust cloud into the atmosphere. Portions of the reactor core are still exposed to open air and rainwater.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/
chernobyl-leaking-radiation-and-sucking-up-canadian-money/article1454040/
============================
12. UPDATE: Nuclear Information and Resource Service – Feb. 04.10
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org
Dear Friends,
First of all: Congratulations! Just since last Thursday, you have bombarded President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu with well over 4,000 letters opposing a tripling of the loan guarantee program for new reactor construction, which would put $54 Billion of your dollars at risk from large, greedy nuclear corporations.
And that's on top of more than 3,200 letters you sent to the Senate against the Clean Energy Development Administration--a greenwashed name for an entity that could hand out unlimited taxpayer loan guarantees for new reactors and coal plants.
Great Job! BUT.....
We need to build on this momentum! We have a real fight on our hands, and if we're going to stop this nonsense, we're going to have to do more. We know we have the facts and arguments on our side: what we need is more outreach and more mobilization. We're ramping up our outreach efforts. Will you help?
Here are a few things you can do to help:
*Support Michael Mariotte's 25th anniversary outreach extravaganza! That's right, Friday will mark my 25th anniversary at NIRS. 25 years of working for you, supporting your tireless efforts to achieve a safe, clean, nuclear-free, carbon-free energy future. We're not spending money on a big party or anything (in fact, so much snow is apparently headed our way tomorrow we may not even be able to get out of the office). Instead we're asking you to make a special contribution of $2.50, $25.00, $250, or even $2500 (or, to be honest, any amount you'd like) that we'll use for more outreach and more mobilization. After all, we know there are millions of Americans who agree with us that nuclear power is dirty, dangerous and extraordinarily expensive. We just need to be able to reach them. We hope you'll support this effort here.
*Please fill out a brief questionnaire about our Alerts here. We want to know how useful they are to you and what we can do to make them better. As an added incentive, we'll give free copies of our full-color booklet Nuclear Power: The Critical Question to 10 respondents selected at random.
*We have two sites on Facebook. If you use Facebook, join the NIRS cause here. And you can become a fan of NIRS here. And then ask your Facebook friends to join up as well. They'll get our Alerts, be able to join in conversations and more.
*If you use Twitter, follow us here. We send out links to articles and reports you probably won't see anywhere else, and provide updates on issues we can't provide any other way.
*Think about who you know who should receive our next Alert, which will come next week, and will urge U.S. House members to oppose a tripling of the loan guarantee program. This is not a done deal--it needs Congressional approval and with your help, we can stop it! Think of your parents, or your children, the neighbor down the street, friends in the next dorm, people in a peace and justice group, or food co-op members, or the PTA, or anyone just generally interested in issues. Get their e-mail addresses together and make sure to forward our next Alert to everyone you can think of.
*Like to write about nuclear issues? Then publish your work on blogs like Huffington Post, DailyKos, Firedoglake, etc. You don't need to be representing an organization, or even be a member of an organization, you just need to write well and submit your views. Include links to important websites and our Alerts. Spreading the word is essential. If you need help doing that, just contact us.
I've been reading recently about how effectively the Republicans used Facebook, e-mail lists and the like to win the recent Massachusetts election, and to build the Tea party movement. President Obama did the same last election. They've been achieving both astonishing growth in outreach, and raising millions of dollars with those tactics, and while we're not trying to win an election, we need to be just as good at these kinds of tactics. But we can't do it without your active participation--the grassroots are the key to this kind of success.
Speaking of millions of dollars, the nuclear industry is now outspending us more than 100 to 1. Check this recent investigative article published by McClatchy News Service. In the first nine months of 2009 alone, the nuclear industry spent $84 million on lobbying and campaign contributions! During the decade 1999-2008, they spent $650 million!
They know how high the stakes are. We'll never be able to raise that kind of money, but with your help, we don't need to. But it's never been more critical to ensure that we do have the funds needed to make your voices heard above the nuclear industry's din. And it's never been more critical for all of us to expand our outreach and mobilization efforts.
So please take the easy steps above. Please watch for next week's Alert and get ready to help us spread it everywhere. Please donate to my 25th anniversary outreach extravaganza.
On a personal note, it's been an honor serving the grassroots movement for a safe, clean, sustainable energy future, and many, many of you individually, for the past 25 years. Your efforts truly make a difference. Sometimes it seems like the odds are just stacked against us, that the nuclear industry can spread its lies with impunity and buy whatever laws and regulations it wants. But remember, it's been nearly 35 years since a reactor was ordered in the U.S. and was actually put into operation. As many reactors were cancelled after being ordered as ever were put into service. Just last year, we beat back two efforts to increase taxpayer loan guarantees by $50 Billion. That's a pretty good record, and one we're going to continue to build upon in the coming months and years.
As always, thanks for all you do. Neither NIRS, nor I, could do any of this without you.
No Nukes!
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
=======================
13. We should not put our money into Obama's misguided nuclear dementia.
http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
From: "Ace Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 10:50 AM
Dear Readers,
There is no such thing as safe, clean nuclear power, and there never will be. There is no such thing as safe containment of nuclear waste, and there never will be. Therefore, we should not put our money into President Obama's misguided nuclear dementia.
Did we learn nothing from 9-11? Did we learn nothing from the tsunami in Banda-Ache? Did we learn nothing from the earthquake in Japan that nearly initiated "Genpatsu-Shinsai"? Did we learn nothing from Davis-Besse's near-meltdown in 2002? Did we learn nothing from Chernobyl?
MORE: http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
=========================
14. GLOBE 2010 - 11th Biennial Conference & Trade Fair on Business & the Environment March 24-26, 2010, Vancouver Convention Centre
- http://www.globe2010.com/
GLOBE 2010 is one of the world's largest and longest-running events dedicated to the business of the environment. Every two years, over 10,000 professionals from 70+ countries come together at GLOBE for three days of thought-leading sessions presented by world-renowned sustainability experts; to survey leading-edge environmental innovations; and to participate in unparalleled global networking opportunities.
Join environmental business leaders, corporate executives, NGOs, and government policymakers from around the world in Vancouver this March 24-26, 2010 to explore the mutually inclusive goals of: corporate sustainability, climate change, carbon management, clean energy, sustainable finance, and greener cities. Special subthemes for GLOBE 2010 include: clean technology, water, sustainable retail, and Auto FutureTech: The future of the auto industry.
GLOBE 2010 Conference Program
http://www.globe2010.com/conference/con ... ogram.aspx
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Corporate Sustainability Toolkit
Climate Change + Carbon Management
The Future of Energy
The Urban Infrastructure Revolution
Etc…..
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
SPEAKERS - Panelists and moderators confirmed to date: http://www.globe2010.com/conference/speakers.aspx
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
GLOBE 2010 Sponsors:
http://www.globe2010.com/trade-fair/exh ... rship.aspx
Compilation:
1. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 – Saskatoon
2. EnerGuide and ecoENERGY Retrofit - February 24, 2010 - Regina
3. Lunch and Learn – Solar Technology in Building – Feb. 26, 2010 - Saskatoon
4. ACTION ALERT: We need at least 5000 letters sent BEFORE FEB. 28TH. – CNANW
5. The Planning of War Behind Closed Doors
6. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker
7. Boom in nuclear energy unlikely: Expert
8. Radiation Risk and Scientific Method: Learning from the Azande?
9. Much higher tritium levels found at nuclear plant
10. Government Admits Targeting Anti-Nuclear Signs – Press Release
11. Chernobyl: Leaking radiation and sucking up Canadian money
12. UPDATE: Nuclear Information and Resource Service – Feb. 04.10
13. We should not put our money into Obama's misguided nuclear dementia.
14. GLOBE 2010 - 11th Biennial Conference & Trade Fair on Business & the Environment March 24-26, 2010, Vancouver Convention Centre
=============================
1. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 - Saskatoon
Where: 7 PM, J.S. Wood Library, 1801 Lansdowne Ave.
Join guest speaker Peter Prebble, Director of Energy and Water Policy for the Saskatchewan Environmental Society, as he reviews the enormous consequences of climate change, the long lived nature of greenhouse gases, and the outcome of the international negotiations at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. In that global context, he will then examine plans to develop an oil sands industry in Saskatchewan and argue for a much more cautious approach than the Saskatchewan government has taken to date. Saskatchewan should learn from Alberta’s serious mistakes and be prepared to reject unsustainable oil sands proposals. The second half of Peter’s presentation will outline concrete steps Saskatchewan can take to sharply reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and create green jobs based on a renewable energy future. Peter will make the case for major Saskatchewan investments in energy efficiency, wind power, small scale hydro, co-generation of electricity, biomass development and solar energy. He will propose a new set of public policies aimed at building a renewable energy society in Saskatchewan. The policy proposals would bring sweeping and exciting change to Saskatchewan. For more information phone 665-1915.
======================
2. EnerGuide and ecoENERGY Retrofit - February 24, 2010 - Regina
Where: 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm, Glen Elm Library
Is winter causing your energy costs to soar! Meet a SaskEnergy representative who will explain the Saskatchewan EnerGuide for Houses and federal ecoENERGY Retrofit programs being offered by the Government of Saskatchewan and Natural Resources Canada. Also, there will be tips on what you can do to make your home more energy efficient. Pre-register by calling 777-6080.
=============================
3. Lunch and Learn – Solar Technology in Building – Feb. 26, 2010 - Saskatoon
Where: Green bag lunch & learn (free): 12:15pm to 1:00pm, (short presentations from all 3 speakers: bring your own lunch), Afternoon teaching session: 1:00pm to 3:00pm. University of Saskatchewan School of Education, studio A (downstairs), University of Regina School of Education, room 158 (sites connected by videoconference facilities)
Speakers: Dr ROB DUMONT, KEN KELLN (Kelln Solar), KELLY WINDER (SRC)
Solar design for buildings - design principles, good practice, available grants
Cost: non-members $30, members $20, students $10). Event presented by Canada Green Building Council SK Chapter
Register now at http://www.picatic.com/ticket/event691560
For more information go to http://www.cagbc.org/chapters/saskatche ... /index.php
===================================
4. ACTION ALERT: We need at least 5000 letters sent BEFORE FEB. 28TH. - CNANW
Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
http://web.net/~cnanw/donate_f.htm
CANADIAN ACTION TOWARD THE ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS DEPENDS ON YOU!
PLEASE SHARE THIS EMAIL WITH ALL APPROPRIATE LISTSERVES,
YOUR FAMILY, FRIENDS, EVERYONE YOU KNOW!
= = = = = =
Dear Friends,
Are you concerned about the threat of nuclear weapons use?
Biological and chemical weapons are banned.
We believe nuclear weapons - threatening thousands of lives and our environment with even a small exchange - should be banned too.
We now have an extremely rare opportunity for progress.
President Obama has called for a Nuclear Weapons-Free World and he has the support of many international leaders.
The Government of Canada can speak out at three important events this year:
• during the ongoing review of the NATO Strategic Concept
(this only occurs once every 10 years)
• at the NonProliferation Treaty Review Conference in May
(this only occurs once every 5 years)
• and during the G8 Summit.
We ask you to send emails that first welcome Canada’s ongoing support for an effective Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and for the Government’s efforts to improve its effectiveness through important institutional reforms.
Then please urge the Government of Canada:
a) to reaffirm Canada's traditional commitment to a world without nuclear weapons,
b) to support the call for an end to nuclear weapons reliance in NATO and the removal of US nuclear weapons in Europe,
c) to support the proposal for preparatory work on a nuclear weapons convention and to work on the verification requirements for nuclear disarmament.
Please send your emails before the end of February to:
Prime Minister Harper at <HarpeS@parl.gc.ca>
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon <CannoL@parl.gc.ca>
Ambassador to NATO <Robert.McRae@international.gc.ca>
Ambassador for Disarmament c/o <Jonathan.Tan@internatonal.gc.ca>
Prefer to mail your letters?
Letters to the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs
can be mailed postage-free to:
House of Commons, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0A6.
Letters to the Ambassadors can be mailed to:
Jonathan Tan, Senior Policy Officer | Agent principal des politiques
Non-Proliferation and Disarmament | Direction de la non-prolifération et du désarmement
Fax: 613-944-1835
125 Sussex Drive,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0G2
For information on the current Canadian context, see this article by Doug Roche and Ernie Regehr:
http://www.cigionline.org/blogs/2010/2/ ... liferation
For further information please go to
http://www.abolishnuclearweapons.ca
We need at least 5000 letters sent - so please share this with your family and friends.
Let's support the international call for a nuclear weapons-free world!
Bev Delong
Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
===================
5. The Planning of War Behind Closed Doors
Brussels, London, Istanbul: A Week Of Western War Councils
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17428
By Rick RozoffGlobal Research, February 5, 2010
Stop NATO: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
The defense chiefs of all 28 NATO nations and an undisclosed number of counterparts from non-Alliance partners gathered in Istanbul, Turkey on February 4 to begin two days of meetings focused on the war in Afghanistan, the withdrawal of military forces from Kosovo in the course of transferring control of security operations to the breakaway province's embryonic army (the Kosovo Security Force) and "the transformation efforts required to best conduct the full range of NATO s agreed missions." [1]
Istanbul was the site of the bloc's 2004 summit which accounted for the largest expansion in its 60-year history - seven new Eastern European nations - and its strengthening military partnerships with thirteen Middle Eastern and African nations under the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.
The Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe Admiral James Stavridis and the top commander of all U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan - soon to reach over 150,000 - General Stanley McChrystal are also in attendance, as are European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton and United Nations High Representative for Afghanistan Kai Eide as well as the defense and interior ministers of Afghanistan.
The meetings follow by a week the International Conference on Afghanistan held in London, which in turn occurred the day after two days of meetings of the NATO Military Committee with the Chiefs of Defense of the military bloc's 28 member states and 35 more from what were described as Troop Contributing Nations; presumably NATO partner nations with troops stationed in the Afghan war theater. In all, the military chiefs of 63 countries.
The U.S.'s McChrystal was present there also as were Israeli Chief of General Staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi and Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. Beforehand the bloc's website reported that "The various meetings will focus on the progress made in ongoing operations and the New Strategic Concept for NATO." [2] That 35 top military commanders from non-NATO countries were present to hear plans for the escalation of what is already the largest war in the world is understandable, as their forces are on the ground as part of a 50-nation plus force under NATO military command.
That the same conference discussed the bloc's 21st century new global military doctrine - former U.S. secretary of state Madeleine Albright delivered an address on the topic - raises the question of how many of the 35 partner states' military chiefs may have joined their 28 NATO colleagues for that phase of discussions. That such a high percentage of the world's leading military commanders attended a two-day affair which deliberated on both the war in South Asia and the expansion of the world's only military bloc's activities even further outside the Euro-Atlantic area (when it has already conducted operations in four continents) confirms that the Afghan war serves more than one purpose for the West. It is the laboratory for strengthening military ties with nations on every inhabited continent and for building the nucleus of and foundation for a potential future world army.
MORE : www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17428
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
German Bundeswehr manual challenges US and UK denials over depleted uranium in Afghanistan
http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/283.html
A classified German Army manual has thrown doubt over US and UK assurances that no depleted uranium munitions have been used in Afghanistan.
21 July 2009 - ICBUW
===================
6. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
deep+thinker/2520409/story.html
BY CASSANDRA KYLE, THE STARPHOENIX FEBRUARY 4, 2010
Cameco Corp. CEO Jerry Grandey has made doubling uranium production a goal of the company
As president and CEO of Cameco Corp., Jerry Grandey is no stranger to spending time in airports.
The Saskatoon-based business leader often jets away to engagements relatively close to home in North America, or as far away as India, where the company recently opened an office.
Last Friday, Grandey spent a few minutes inside the Prince Albert airport. That's where Star Phoenix business reporter Cassandra Kyle asked Cameco's CEO five questions about the company's future.
SP: When would you like to see production begin at Cigar Lake? (Emphasis added. Ed)
JG: Well, I think the answer to that is as soon as possible. We're now down the shaft well over 400 metres and we're getting a glimpse of some of the underground workings. We haven't put our feet down there yet, but from the cage we're able to kind of look around.
But only when we're finally able to walk through the underground workings and see what the condition is from being underwater, now a little over three years, are we going to be able to answer that question.
We're making great progress. There's a lot of innovation, a lot of creativity that goes on up there every day to try and move it forward as fast as we can.
SP: Cameco raised hundreds of millions of dollars (on the market) in 2009. Will the company be announcing any acquisitions soon? (Emphasis added. Ed.)
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
deep+thinker/2520409/story.html
===================
7. Boom in nuclear energy unlikely: Expert
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Boom+nuclear+energy+unlikely+Expert/2523121/story.html
By Mike De Souza, Canwest News Service February 4, 2010 3:12 PM
OTTAWA — An expansion of nuclear facilities and energy sources is unlikely to occur over the next two decades, unless the global community adopts major changes to improve safety and security as well as working to prevent the risk of proliferation, said a new report released on Thursday.
The study, released at Carleton University by an independent think-tank, concluded that the nuclear industry faces too many barriers when compared to other sources of energy.
"The significant constraints, while not insurmountable, are likely to outweigh the drivers," said the report, Nuclear Energy and Global Governance to 2030: An Action Plan. (http://www.cigionline.org/articles/2010 ... igi-report )
“For the vast majority of states, nuclear power will be as elusive as ever."
The report was based on nearly four years of research by a team at the Centre for International Governance Innovation and was written by Dr. Trevor Findlay, the director at Carleton's Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance.
It concluded that the economics and regulatory constraints of developing nuclear power plants were among the biggest barriers for the industry. It also said that alternative forms of energy would be better options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in terms of their feasibility and cost.
"Nuclear energy is not nimble enough to meet the threat of climate change in the short term," the report said. "A nuclear power plant can take a decade of planning, regulatory processes, construction and testing before producing electricity. Cheaper, more quickly deployed alternatives, including energy efficiency, will likely prevail."
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Boom+nuclear+energy+unlikely+Expert/2523121/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
INFO: Trevor Findlay, CIGI Senior Fellow
http://www.cigionline.org/person/trevor-findlay
Director: Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance (CCTC) © 2005-2010
http://www.carleton.ca/cctc/staff.html#trevor
=======================
8. Radiation Risk and Scientific Method: Learning from the Azande?
http://www.greenaudit.org/Azande%20Science.htm
The following text is taken from a presentation made by Chris Busby to the Royal Society on 19 July 2000 as part of their 'scientific' investigation into the possible health effects of depleted uranium weapons.
The full text can be found on the website of the Low Level Radiation Campaign: llrc.org.
The classical exposition of the scientific, or inductive method (originally due to William of Occam) is what is now called Mill’s Canons, the two most important of which are:
· The Canon of Agreement which states that whatever there is in common between the antecedent conditions of a phenomenon can be supposed to be the cause, or related to the cause, of the phenomenon.
· The Canon of Difference which states that the differences in the conditions under which an effect occurs and those under which it does not must be the cause or related to the cause of that effect.
In addition, the method relies upon the Principle of Accumulation which states that scientific knowledge grows additively by the discovery of independent laws, and the Principle of Instance Confirmation, that the degree of belief in the truth of a law is proportional to the number of favourable instances of the law.
Finally to the methods of inductive reasoning we should add considerations of plausibility of mechanism.
These are the basic methods of science [Mill, 1879; Harre, 1985; Papineau, 1996]
Let us first define our question. It is this. What are the health consequences of exposure to novel internal radioisotopes at whole organ dose levels below 2mSv? Because we are looking at battlefield DU, we should add that in this case, although the element is ‘natural’, the exposure is novel, and due to internal sub-micron Uranium Oxide particles embedded in tissue.
Although risks from exposure to high levels of ionizing radiation are generally accepted, since they are fairly immediate and graphic, the situation with regard to low-level exposure is curious. There are now two mutually exclusive models describing the health consequences of exposure to low-level radiation. There is a nuclear establishment one, which is that which is presently used to set legislation on exposures and argue that DU is safe, and a radical one, which is espoused by the anti-nuclear movement and its associated scientists. I show these two models schematically in Fig 2.
MORE: http://www.greenaudit.org/Azande%20Science.htm
=======================
9. Much higher tritium levels found at nuclear plant
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/04/AR2010020403593.html
By Dave Gram, The Associated Press, Thursday, February 4, 2010
MONTPELIER, Vt. -- A radioactive substance recently found in groundwater monitoring wells at a Vermont nuclear plant has turned up again at levels more than nine times those previously reported and more than 37 times higher than a federal safe drinking water
limit, officials said Thursday.
Officials at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, state Health Department and federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission said a newly dug monitoring well at the Vernon reactor turned up a reading of nearly 775,000 picocuries per liter. It was by far the highest reading reported yet for tritium, which has been linked to cancer when ingested in large amounts.
Despite the much higher reading, an NRC spokeswoman said Thursday there was nothing to fear.
"There's not currently, nor is there likely to be, an impact on public health or safety or the environment," the NRC's Diane Screnci said in an interview. She had maintained previously that the Environmental Protection Agency drinking water safety limit of 20,000 picocuries per liter had an abundance of caution built into it.
California's state limit is 50 times lower than the EPA's, 400 picocuries per liter. The National Academy of Sciences said in 2005 that any exposure to ionizing radiation from an isotope like tritium elevates the risk of cancer, though it also said with small exposures, the risk would be low.
News of the new reading came nearly a month after the Jan. 7 announcement that tritium had been discovered in a monitoring well at the Vernon reactor. No source has yet been found.
Plant spokesman Robert Williams said in an e-mail Thursday that the new reading is "good news" because it could indicate plant technicians searching for the leak are zeroing in on a source.
"The good news is that one newly installed well, located just to the east of the plant's condensate water storage tank and some underground piping, appears to be closer to the source because its concentration is 774,825 picocuries per liter," Williams wrote in the e-mail.
But he also said test results can fluctuate with the flow of groundwater through the area being tested. He noted that the well in which contamination was first reported was up over 36,000 picocuries per liter, from 17,000 when first reported. A second well, which showed a reading above about 85,000 picocuries per liter on Tuesday, had dropped below 70,000.
MORE:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/04/AR2010020403593.html
=====================
10. Government Admits Targeting Anti-Nuclear Signs – Press Release
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1545#1545
From: Ent Work
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:35 PM For Immediate Release
Alberta Transportation Admits Nuclear Signs Were Targeted!
Alberta Transportation confirmed they targeted anti-nuclear signs in the Peace River area for removal. The recorded meeting between Regional Director, Wayne Franklin and two anti-nuclear groups made up of farmers from the area was held in Peace River on February 1, 2010. The evidence presented by the Weberville Area Connection and Earth Alternatives could not be denied or dismissed.
Mr. Franklin’s admission was in stark contrast to the denials and obfuscations put forward by other senior staff at Alberta Transportation during three previous meetings in January.
Mr. Franklin was unable to explain why our anti-nuclear signs were removed and other non-conforming signs weren’t. We are still waiting for an explanation for this breach of policy. We provided pictures showing the non-conforming signs they had to walk past to be able to remove the anti-nuclear signs.
Alberta Transportation maintains that it was only coincidence the order to remove our signs was issued the same day Mel Knight announced the nuclear project could proceed. They claim it was also coincidence that they issued an order to remove our anti-nuclear trailer the business-day after we showed up unannounced at Frank Oberle’s office on November 13, 2009.
We don’t believe in this many coincidences. We will be filing FOIP requests to determine if MLA Frank Oberle or other government official corresponded with Alberta Transportation concerning our anti-nuclear signs.
Alberta Transportation was unable to provide statutes defining acceptable messages on signs, although Mr. Franklin did admit there was no difference between a “No To Nuclear” sign and a “No Hunting” sign.
We’ve committed to ongoing dialogue with Mr. Franklin to resolve this issue and the consequences we’ve suffered as a result. A transcript of the February 1, 2010 meeting is available upon request.
In related news, MP Chris Warkentin agreed to meet with the Weberville Area Connection and Earth Alternatives before he returns to Ottawa to hear our concerns about the Federal Government’s handling of the nuclear situation in Peace River to date. Our foremost concern is that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency have met with surrounding First Nations communities to explain the environmental assessment process, yet they refuse to come to the community that will be most affected. Why are we not being extended the same courtesy and rights? - 30 -
Pat McNamara, Weberville Area Connection entwork@hotmail.com
Brent Reese, Earth Alternatives, (780) 836-3796
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
BACKGROUND
On January 6, (2010) five of us met with Gerard Gravel, a senior technologist with 30 years in the Peace River office of Alberta Transportation. He told us that La Prairie Group was ordered to remove all signs on public property but a La Prairie employee told us that they were only ordered to take down “No To Nuclear” (NTN) signs. Indeed, only the anti-nuclear signs were removed. All other signs were left where they were.
Mr. Gravel told us that letters were sent out to owners of all signs on private property that had no permits. We pointed out to him that this was not true as one farmer with two commercial signs on the same fence-line beside a NTN sign only received a letter about his NTN sign. None of them had permits.
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1545#1545
============================
11. Chernobyl: Leaking radiation and sucking up Canadian money
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/
chernobyl-leaking-radiation-and-sucking-up-canadian-money/article1454040/
Thirteen years after Canada and other nations pledged $768-million to render the destroyed nuclear reactor safe, the cost has ballooned to $2-billion and the job still isn't done
Doug Saunders, Globe and Mail, Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Kiev — Almost a quarter-century after its explosion killed hundreds and shocked the world, the Chernobyl nuclear reactor still sits crumbling amid an uninhabitable wasteland in northern Ukraine, still emits surprising amounts of radiation, and still absorbs vast amounts of money.
Much of that money, at least $71-million of it, has come from Canadian taxpayers, intended to pay for a project launched in 1997 under a pledge from leaders of the G-7 countries to enclose the reactor in a permanent, sealed sarcophagus.
It was meant to be finished in eight years and cost $768-million (U.S.), a symbol of a resurgent Ukraine returning to democratic government and an open economy, putting the 1986 disaster permanently in the past.
But in a story of tragic disappointment that exemplifies the web of corruption and distrust that so often ensnares relations between Ukraine and the West, 13 years later the cost of the project has ballooned to almost $2-billion and construction has not even begun.
Canadian officials describe it as a “money sink” that has fallen prey to the worst aspects of Ukraine's failed development, a physical manifestation of the once-wealthy country's political decay.
Later this year, after the G-8 conference in Huntsville, Ont., the Canadian government will be asked to make another pledge, likely in the tens of millions of dollars, in an effort to raise another $200-million to $300-million to get the job done by the end of 2012, before the reactor decays further and poses an even graver danger. While the reactor's original sarcophagus, built in a hurry after the disaster, was recently reinforced, it is a flimsy structure that could collapse, sending a radioactive dust cloud into the atmosphere. Portions of the reactor core are still exposed to open air and rainwater.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/
chernobyl-leaking-radiation-and-sucking-up-canadian-money/article1454040/
============================
12. UPDATE: Nuclear Information and Resource Service – Feb. 04.10
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org
Dear Friends,
First of all: Congratulations! Just since last Thursday, you have bombarded President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu with well over 4,000 letters opposing a tripling of the loan guarantee program for new reactor construction, which would put $54 Billion of your dollars at risk from large, greedy nuclear corporations.
And that's on top of more than 3,200 letters you sent to the Senate against the Clean Energy Development Administration--a greenwashed name for an entity that could hand out unlimited taxpayer loan guarantees for new reactors and coal plants.
Great Job! BUT.....
We need to build on this momentum! We have a real fight on our hands, and if we're going to stop this nonsense, we're going to have to do more. We know we have the facts and arguments on our side: what we need is more outreach and more mobilization. We're ramping up our outreach efforts. Will you help?
Here are a few things you can do to help:
*Support Michael Mariotte's 25th anniversary outreach extravaganza! That's right, Friday will mark my 25th anniversary at NIRS. 25 years of working for you, supporting your tireless efforts to achieve a safe, clean, nuclear-free, carbon-free energy future. We're not spending money on a big party or anything (in fact, so much snow is apparently headed our way tomorrow we may not even be able to get out of the office). Instead we're asking you to make a special contribution of $2.50, $25.00, $250, or even $2500 (or, to be honest, any amount you'd like) that we'll use for more outreach and more mobilization. After all, we know there are millions of Americans who agree with us that nuclear power is dirty, dangerous and extraordinarily expensive. We just need to be able to reach them. We hope you'll support this effort here.
*Please fill out a brief questionnaire about our Alerts here. We want to know how useful they are to you and what we can do to make them better. As an added incentive, we'll give free copies of our full-color booklet Nuclear Power: The Critical Question to 10 respondents selected at random.
*We have two sites on Facebook. If you use Facebook, join the NIRS cause here. And you can become a fan of NIRS here. And then ask your Facebook friends to join up as well. They'll get our Alerts, be able to join in conversations and more.
*If you use Twitter, follow us here. We send out links to articles and reports you probably won't see anywhere else, and provide updates on issues we can't provide any other way.
*Think about who you know who should receive our next Alert, which will come next week, and will urge U.S. House members to oppose a tripling of the loan guarantee program. This is not a done deal--it needs Congressional approval and with your help, we can stop it! Think of your parents, or your children, the neighbor down the street, friends in the next dorm, people in a peace and justice group, or food co-op members, or the PTA, or anyone just generally interested in issues. Get their e-mail addresses together and make sure to forward our next Alert to everyone you can think of.
*Like to write about nuclear issues? Then publish your work on blogs like Huffington Post, DailyKos, Firedoglake, etc. You don't need to be representing an organization, or even be a member of an organization, you just need to write well and submit your views. Include links to important websites and our Alerts. Spreading the word is essential. If you need help doing that, just contact us.
I've been reading recently about how effectively the Republicans used Facebook, e-mail lists and the like to win the recent Massachusetts election, and to build the Tea party movement. President Obama did the same last election. They've been achieving both astonishing growth in outreach, and raising millions of dollars with those tactics, and while we're not trying to win an election, we need to be just as good at these kinds of tactics. But we can't do it without your active participation--the grassroots are the key to this kind of success.
Speaking of millions of dollars, the nuclear industry is now outspending us more than 100 to 1. Check this recent investigative article published by McClatchy News Service. In the first nine months of 2009 alone, the nuclear industry spent $84 million on lobbying and campaign contributions! During the decade 1999-2008, they spent $650 million!
They know how high the stakes are. We'll never be able to raise that kind of money, but with your help, we don't need to. But it's never been more critical to ensure that we do have the funds needed to make your voices heard above the nuclear industry's din. And it's never been more critical for all of us to expand our outreach and mobilization efforts.
So please take the easy steps above. Please watch for next week's Alert and get ready to help us spread it everywhere. Please donate to my 25th anniversary outreach extravaganza.
On a personal note, it's been an honor serving the grassroots movement for a safe, clean, sustainable energy future, and many, many of you individually, for the past 25 years. Your efforts truly make a difference. Sometimes it seems like the odds are just stacked against us, that the nuclear industry can spread its lies with impunity and buy whatever laws and regulations it wants. But remember, it's been nearly 35 years since a reactor was ordered in the U.S. and was actually put into operation. As many reactors were cancelled after being ordered as ever were put into service. Just last year, we beat back two efforts to increase taxpayer loan guarantees by $50 Billion. That's a pretty good record, and one we're going to continue to build upon in the coming months and years.
As always, thanks for all you do. Neither NIRS, nor I, could do any of this without you.
No Nukes!
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
=======================
13. We should not put our money into Obama's misguided nuclear dementia.
http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
From: "Ace Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 10:50 AM
Dear Readers,
There is no such thing as safe, clean nuclear power, and there never will be. There is no such thing as safe containment of nuclear waste, and there never will be. Therefore, we should not put our money into President Obama's misguided nuclear dementia.
Did we learn nothing from 9-11? Did we learn nothing from the tsunami in Banda-Ache? Did we learn nothing from the earthquake in Japan that nearly initiated "Genpatsu-Shinsai"? Did we learn nothing from Davis-Besse's near-meltdown in 2002? Did we learn nothing from Chernobyl?
MORE: http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
=========================
14. GLOBE 2010 - 11th Biennial Conference & Trade Fair on Business & the Environment March 24-26, 2010, Vancouver Convention Centre
- http://www.globe2010.com/
GLOBE 2010 is one of the world's largest and longest-running events dedicated to the business of the environment. Every two years, over 10,000 professionals from 70+ countries come together at GLOBE for three days of thought-leading sessions presented by world-renowned sustainability experts; to survey leading-edge environmental innovations; and to participate in unparalleled global networking opportunities.
Join environmental business leaders, corporate executives, NGOs, and government policymakers from around the world in Vancouver this March 24-26, 2010 to explore the mutually inclusive goals of: corporate sustainability, climate change, carbon management, clean energy, sustainable finance, and greener cities. Special subthemes for GLOBE 2010 include: clean technology, water, sustainable retail, and Auto FutureTech: The future of the auto industry.
GLOBE 2010 Conference Program
http://www.globe2010.com/conference/con ... ogram.aspx
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Corporate Sustainability Toolkit
Climate Change + Carbon Management
The Future of Energy
The Urban Infrastructure Revolution
Etc…..
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
SPEAKERS - Panelists and moderators confirmed to date: http://www.globe2010.com/conference/speakers.aspx
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
GLOBE 2010 Sponsors:
http://www.globe2010.com/trade-fair/exh ... rship.aspx
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 10, 2010
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:23 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 10, 2010
Compilation:
1. WATCH: My Nuclear Neighbour : The Nature of Things with David Suzuki - CBC TV – Thursday – 8 p.m.
2. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 – Saskatoon
3. Dim outlook for nuke industry
4. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 5, 2010
5. Nuclear energy unsafe
6. Ban the bomb spirit lives on
7. It's time to set course for global zero
8. No Major Nuclear Revival by 2030, Says CIGI Report
9. Obama's Nuclear Giveaway
10. Obama pulls plug on Yucca
=======================
1. WATCH: My Nuclear Neighbour : The Nature of Things with David Suzuki - CBC TV – Thursday – 8 p.m.
Mark your calendar to be sure and watch this Nature of Things documentary about how our northern Alberta friends are facing the prospect of nuclear power going in next door. It's on Thursday, February 11 at 8 p.m. on CBC TV.
Find out more at:
http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/2010/
mynuclearneighbour/
==================
2. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 - Saskatoon
Where: 7 PM, J.S. Wood Library, 1801 Lansdowne Ave.
Join guest speaker Peter Prebble, Director of Energy and Water Policy for the Saskatchewan Environmental Society, as he reviews the enormous consequences of climate change, the long lived nature of greenhouse gases, and the outcome of the international negotiations at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. In that global context, he will then examine plans to develop an oil sands industry in Saskatchewan and argue for a much more cautious approach than the Saskatchewan government has taken to date. Saskatchewan should learn from Alberta’s serious mistakes and be prepared to reject unsustainable oil sands proposals. The second half of Peter’s presentation will outline concrete steps Saskatchewan can take to sharply reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and create green jobs based on a renewable energy future. Peter will make the case for major Saskatchewan investments in energy efficiency, wind power, small scale hydro, co-generation of electricity, biomass development and solar energy. He will propose a new set of public policies aimed at building a renewable energy society in Saskatchewan. The policy proposals would bring sweeping and exciting change to Saskatchewan. For more information phone 665-1915.
=====================
3. Dim outlook for nuke industry
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
760858--dim-outlook-for-nuke-industry
Tyler Hamilton,The Toronto Star, February 5, 2010 thestar.com
A coming "nuclear renaissance" is often cited by government and industry officials as reason to keep investing in Canada's nuclear-power sector. Without support, they say, the country risks being sidelined in a market poised for massive expansion.
But that growth, according to an independent report released Thursday, simply isn't happening. After 10 years of industry cheerleading, the world's fleet of nuclear reactors has become smaller.
"There has been, in fact, a decline in the contribution of nuclear power to the world electricity production, from 16.7 per cent in 2000 to 13.5 per cent in 2008," said the report, the result of a three-year study by the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Ottawa.
The centre was founded in 2002 by Jim Balsillie, co-chief executive of Research In Motion Ltd. of Waterloo.
"The industry is struggling to quickly reverse a profound stagnation that has occurred since the boom years of the 1970s and 1980s."
And it's likely to struggle for at least the next 20 years, it added. "Significant expansion of nuclear energy worldwide to 2030 faces constraints that, while not insurmountable, are likely to outweigh the drivers of nuclear energy."
Louis Fréchette, chair of the centre's "Nuclear Energy Futures" project, said the findings are based on "exhaustive" consultations with industry experts and a thorough review of industry literature.
Asked what the conclusions mean for Canada, she warned officials against making unrealistic assumptions.
"If the future of the Canadian industry rests on the major expansion of nuclear demand worldwide, then I think you have to be careful. What we're saying is that it would be wise to make prudent assumptions as to the size of the market."
MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
760858--dim-outlook-for-nuke-industry
========================
4. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 5, 2010
Top Stories
Obama administration moves to cancel Yucca dump, creates blue ribbon commission to seek "Plan B"
Background: Fulfilling a campaign pledge to Nevadans, President Barack Obama has zeroed out the Fiscal Year 2011 budget request for the proposed Yucca Mountain national repository for high-level radioactive waste disposal. Secretary Steven Chu has moved to withdraw the U.S. Department of Energy's application from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license proceeding, and has established a blue ribbon commission to report on alternatives for waste management in the next 18 to 24 months.
Our View: The 23 year long Yucca Mountain dump "illusion of a solution" to the radioactive waste crisis is finally over. Given Yucca's geologic unsuitability, and its sacredness to the Western Shoshone Indian Nation, the dump's cancellation represents a tremendous victory for the environment and for justice. But Chu's choice of name (Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future) and mission statement emphasizes atomic energy's expansion, rather than the safe management of radioactive waste, echoing Obama's State of the Union Address call for "building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country." Based on their past behavior, Chu's choice of panel members Exelon Nuclear CEO John Rowe, former Republican U.S. Senator Pete Domenici from New Mexico, and former NRC Chairman Richard Meserve raises red flags that dangerous new illusions of solutions - such as reprocessing and centralized interim storage - will very likely be advocated as alternatives to the Yucca dump.
What You Can Do: Call President Obama (202-456-1414) and Energy Secretary Chu (202-586-6210) to thank them for their wise decision to cancel the Yucca Mountain dump. Also call U.S. Senator Harry Reid (202-224-3542) and U.S. Representative Shelley Berkley (202-225-5965), both of Nevada, to thank them for their decades of leadership in stopping the Yucca Mountain dump. But be sure to quickly add that environmental organizations must be listened to by the Chu blue ribbon commission, that hardened on-site storage is urgently needed, and that reprocessing and "parking lot dumps" would make the radioactive waste problems worse, not better.
Obama's tripling of taxpayer-backed nuclear reactor loan guarantee bailouts risks nuclear weapons proliferation
Background: Following closely upon his call in the State of the Union Address for "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country," President Obama's Fiscal Year 2011 Department of Energy (DOE) budget has requested a tripling of new reactor loan guarantees. $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees for new reactors was approved by Congress and President Bush at the end of 2007 (as well as an additional $2.0 billion for new uranium enrichment facilities), but President Obama has now proposed to raise that amount to $54.5 billion. Responding to reporters at his budget roll out press conference, Energy Secretary Chu said that $54.5 billion in loan guarantees could finance 7 to 10 new atomic reactors.
Our View: We are curious to know what 7 to 10 new reactor proposals Secretary Chu and President Obama think are worthy of such high-stakes taxpayer risks. An environmental coalition press conference entitled "EXPERTS: NO GOOD CANDIDATES EXIST FOR CURRENT NUCLEAR REACTOR LOAN GUARANTEE BAILOUT FUNDS, MUCH LESS TRIPLED AMOUNT UNDER OBAMA BUDGET PLAN" has made clear, from watchdogs on the ground, that even DOE's top four candidates - supposedly the best of the nuclear power industry's applications for loan guarantees for the first $18.5 billion - are themselves very bad proposals, already suffering from cost overruns, schedule delays, and safety design flaws, long before the first shovel of dirt has been turned. In addition, Henry D. Sokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, who served on the federal Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation, and Terrorism, has warned that expanding public subsidies for an expansion of atomic power risks proliferation of nuclear weapons. Beyond Nuclear has consistently warned of the inextricable link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. Thus, President Obama's call for a tripling of nuclear loan guarantees contradicts his own praiseworthy call for a world free from nuclear weapons.
What You Can Do: Call President Obama (202-456-1414), your two U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative (via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard, 202-224-3121), and urge them to not expand the nuclear loan guarantee program, in order to avert many billions in taxpayer dollars being lost at each defaulted new reactor project, as well as to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.
Uncontrolled radiation releases still getting out of Vermont Yankee
Background: New test wells sunk around the Vermont Yankee nuclear power station have revealed rising radiation levels in groundwater on the banks of the Connecticut River near the town of Vernon, Vermont. Three 30-foot deep test wells are now in evidence of water contaminated with tritium, radioactive hydrogen, where radiation levels have now ranged from 17,000 picocuries per liter to 800,000 picocuries per liter. The Vermont Public Health Department is describing it as "a very serious situation." State officials are now looking to sample water from deeper aquifers in the bedrock under the reactor.
Our View: Today's groundwater is tomorrow's drinking water. "Tritiated water" is chemically identical to water. Only now, it is radioactive water with a half-life of 12.3 years. That means that it can pose a biological hazard for 120 years. If inhaled, ingested or absorbed, tritium will displace hydrogen molecules in the water that makes up 70% of human tissues and cells and 80% of our DNA. Carbon bonded tritium can be retained in the body for more than a year. Tritium is a clinically proven cause of cancer, birth defects and mutations with no known safe threshold. Vermont Yankee is only the latest is a series of uncontrolled radiation releases from nuclear power stations that continue to occur around the country. First discovered on January 6, 2010, the source of the now month old Yankee leak has still not been found. The reach and depth of the underground water borne radioactive plume is unknown. The nuclear industry has repeatedly been caught hiding the facts and lying about the leaks to the public and their officials. Federal regulators continue to trivialize the significance and the risks posed by these uncontrolled and unmonitored releases. And while these liquid radioactive releases to the water are garnering attention, we should be starting investigations into undisclosed radioactive gas releases from nuclear reactors as well.
What You Can Do: Your nuclear power station has anywhere from 30 to 50 buried pipes systems that carry radioactive water in a buried tangle of corroding pipes that have gone uninspected and unmaintained for decades. Industry and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission plan to study the problem for years before announcing a corrective action plan. Watch for the upcoming release of our report on this public health issue and make sure that your Congressional representatives get a copy.
Beyond Nuclear in the News
Kevin Kamps quoted in The Day, February 3, 2010, White House plan to scratch nuclear waste site plays to mixed reviews.
Linda Gunter writes in The Daily Kos, February 1, 2010 Why environmentalists must fight back against Obama's kiss to polluters (Also available via the Blog button).
Linda Gunter writes on AlterNet.org, February 2010, Imagine Haiti with radiation sickness; why we must disarm.
Paul Gunter and Kevin Kamps quoted in Rutland Herald, February 1, 2010, Unsafe at any level.
Kevin Kamps quoted Earth Times, January 29, 2010, Obama steps up nuclear energy commitment; creates commission.
Kevin Kamps quoted in Las Vegas Sun, January 30, 2010, Dying Yucca Mountain still has some life.
Kevin Kamps quoted in Die Zeit, January 30, 2010, Obama opens the way for atomic energy.
Kevin Kamps quoted in El Universal, Caracas, Venezuela, January 29, 2010, Obama promotes major use of nuclear energy.
Paul Gunter quoted in The Washington Post (By David Gramm, Associated Press), February 1, 2010. Vt nuke plant leaks renew debate over aging plants.
=======================
5. Nuclear energy unsafe
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/
Nuclear+energy+unsafe/2525073/story.html
Edmonton Journal February 5, 2010
The following is my comment on a deceptive report by the University of Alberta group, and their subsequent defence of this at the Jan. 31 forum:
It is very unfortunate that Professor Davidson and colleagues introduced this report on nuclear energy as if the problem is one of public perception and knowledge, not of what it is, the very real danger of nuclear power to human life.
Nuclear energy is radioactive material that kills upon contact; that is useful in killing cancers, but that is only a tiny amount of the result of having a functional nuclear reactor in your neighbourhood. All reactors emit radioactive effluent daily; Alberta is at the headwaters of rivers that go all across Canada; reactors are usually built on a river. Thus, we would be threatening the safety of water systems all across Canada, including the sources of drinking water.
In times of a summer drought, a reactor must take too much of the available water to keep cool enough to prevent it from exploding. That leaves inadequate water for the population.
As well, reactors age and have accidents and leaks, most recently, a leak this past week from a reactor in Vermont.
These are only two of the serious problems with nuclear power. The long-term problem of safe waste storage for the hundreds of thousands of years needed for protection from radioactive substances while they progress through their various half-lives, is one of the problems that cannot be solved. All other forms of energy sources are preferable to this deadly form of energy.
The economic and health comparisons to coal are erroneous. Both these costs, with coal, do not have to consider the hundreds of thousands of years of storage of nuclear energy. Coal, as a substance, is not itself deadly upon contact, thus, the costs of insurance and protection cannot begin to compare.
The nuclear industry spokespeople, as in the Vermont leak last week, continue to claim that there is not a known link between nuclear effluents and leaks to cancer rates. This is like the tobacco industry not taking responsibility until thousands were dead from smoke-related cancer, and the courts had to force that industry to take their responsibility for these tragedies.
The government says now that it will limit its financial involvement, but, with nuclear projects, this has not been possible for any other regions.
When nuclear problems occur and companies refuse to take financial responsibility, governments must, and the people who do not want this and realize its dangers are left to pay for the resulting problems through poorer health, sometimes early death, and higher taxes.
The report discusses probabilities in numbers of lives lost by nuclear power, as compared to other sources of damage to human health. This is deceiving, as the potential for catastrophic damage with nuclear power is unparalleled with anything presently known.
Why is the government of Alberta willing to jeopardize lives for something that could be accomplished in much safer ways?
The public is right to remind the government and these university professors that this project does not belong in Alberta.
Janet E. Smith, Edmonton
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
===========================
6. Ban the bomb spirit lives on
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
760235--ban-the-bomb-spirit-lives-on
Toronto Star, Thursday, Feb 4 2010
The Ban the Bomb movement isn't dead. It strutted its stuff in Paris this week at a conference of nuclear activists, under the banner of the Global Zero campaign. Delegates recalled the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and made the case for a world rid of nuclear weapons.
They also won friends in high places.
Both U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev sent welcome messages of support to the international assembly of politicians, diplomats, generals, business leaders, clerics, academics and arms experts.
Obama reaffirmed his campaign promise that "a world without nuclear weapons . . . is one of my highest priorities." That vision, however long-term, matters. Obama and Medvedev control 95 per cent of the world's 23,000 nukes. They can make change happen.
The Global Zero conference, which wraps up today, also enjoys the support of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Jimmy Carter, Mikhail Gorbachev and other well-known figures. "Every dollar spent on weapons is one less spent on schools, life-saving medicine, or research into life-affirming technologies," Ban said this week in a
video message to the gathering.
As Nobel laureate John Polanyi wrote on the Star's Opinion page last Sunday, there's nothing utopian about disarmament. The Americans and Russians got rid of 50,000 nuclear weapons as the Cold War faded. What's needed is the political will to go much further. Global Zero is "the pole to which our compasses should point," Polanyi says.
The Paris meeting was well-timed. Obama and Medvedev are finalizing a major new treaty to scrap 2,000 of the 5,000 strategic (long-range) warheads they have in their stockpiles. That adds to the moral pressure on North Korea and Iran to scrap their nascent programs.
As momentum builds, Global Zero will focus its attention on cutting the more than 20,000 remaining strategic and tactical nuclear weapons held by the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France, Israel, India and Pakistan. One sensible measure boosts hopes for another.
MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
760235--ban-the-bomb-spirit-lives-on
==========================
7. It's time to set course for global zero
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/
its-time-to-set-the-course-for-global-zero/article1455374/
A bold initiative to eliminate nuclear weapons merits more than a chilly French politeness
by Timothy Garton Ash, Globe and Mail, Wednesday, Feb. 3, 2010
PARIS — “Peaceniks” is not the word that comes to mind as you contemplate this array of smartly dressed current and former presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers, generals and ambassadors, their neat if thinning coiffures reflected in the gilded mirrors of an ornate hall in one of Paris's grand hotels. Yet, they have come together to advance a goal as ambitious as any pony-tailed peacenik ever had: the total elimination of all nuclear weapons by 2030. Global zero.
The obstacles along the road to zero are enormous. They include the country in which we sit. France's approach recalls the name of one of its nuclear submarines: L'Inflexible . As the head of the French foreign service told this audience, nuclear deterrence had served his country well for half a century.
Russia has joined with the U.S. in supporting the initiative, in principle, and envisaging further big cuts in their still outsize nuclear arsenals. But if the U.S. Senate were to demand the introduction of a modernized nuclear weapon as its price for ratifying a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia, there would be angry Russian voices asking what was going on.
The smaller the nuclear arsenals become, the heavier America's superiority in so-called conventional weaponry would appear to weigh. Although this is a cosmopolitan gathering, the driving voices here are American. Suspicious Russians and Chinese will say there is a reason for that.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/
its-time-to-set-the-course-for-global-zero/article1455374/
=========================
8. No Major Nuclear Revival by 2030, Says CIGI Report
http://au.sys-con.com/node/1273879
Global nuclear governance nevertheless needs improving
Marketwire, Thu Feb 4 2010
WATERLOO, CANADA--(Marketwire - Feb. 4, 2010) - A significant expansion of nuclear energy worldwide is unlikely to occur before 2030. This provides a window of opportunity to urgently fix the currently inadequate system for governing nuclear energy to avoid accidents, nuclear terrorism and weapons proliferation.
These are the key findings of the three-and-a-half year Nuclear Energy Futures project released today by The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Ottawa. The project was unique in considering together the normally 'stove-piped' subjects of nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation. Nuclear Energy and Global Governance to 2030 reports the findings of the three-and-a-half year Nuclear Energy Futures project. Flowing from the findings is the project's five-point Action Plan for policymakers in Canada and abroad.
"Concerns about nuclear terrorism and weapons proliferation will be the focus of several important international gatherings in the coming months, including the G-8 Summit. The proposed Action Plan points to concrete steps that can be taken to make the world safer for nuclear energy," said Madame Louise Frechette, chair of the Nuclear Energy Futures project and a distinguished fellow at CIGI.
The report argues that a significant expansion of nuclear energy is unlikely to happen before 2030, due to a number of constraints on the plans of both existing and aspiring nuclear energy states. "Despite some powerful drivers, a revival of nuclear energy faces too many barriers compared to other means of generating electricity," states Trevor Findlay, director of the project and author of the report.
Barriers that present challenges to the revival of nuclear energy are:
. . . . .
MORE: http://au.sys-con.com/node/1273879
========================
9. Obama's Nuclear Giveaway
http://motherjones.com/environment/2010/02/
obamas-nuclear-giveaway
Buried in the budget is a plan to underwrite the nuclear industry’s revival.
By Kate Sheppard | Thu Feb. 4, 2010 3:00 AM PST
In September 2007, the city of San Antonio and NRG Energy announced a partnership to build two new nuclear reactors—the first new nuclear project to be initiated in the United States in decades. The project represented, one of the partners promised, "a milestone for our long-term energy future [1]."
The project, initially estimated to cost $5.8 billion, quickly became a leading candidate for a Department of Energy (DOE) program in which the government would guarantee loans to finance new nuclear plants. In less than a year, however, the plant's projected cost had more than doubled to $13 billion. By April 2009, an independent report had calculated that the real cost [2] of the plant could be as high as $22 billion. In December, San Antonio's municipal utility, CPS, announced it was bailing out of the venture entirely and suing NRG, arguing that NRG and Toshiba—which was contracted to construct the reactors—had lied about the price tag of the venture.
After this debacle, one would think the government would be wary about underwriting projects with such dicey finances. Yet the Obama administration's 2011 budget proposes tripling the loan guarantee program—from the $18.5 billion that Congress has already approved to $54.5 billion. The program's expansion is just one of several signs that the Obama administration is throwing its muscle behind the nuclear industry's push for a massive expansion.
"We are aggressively pursuing nuclear energy," said Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Monday when he rolled out the department's budget proposal. Several days earlier, Chu had unveiled a blue-ribbon panel to assess nuclear waste disposal, seen as one of the most significant barriers to a nuclear revival. And in his State of the Union address Obama argued that creating new clean energy jobs "means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country."
But as Mother Jones has reported [3], there will be no nuclear renaissance unless the US taxpayer covers the tab. While the country's 104 nuclear power plants currently produce nearly 20 percent of American electricity, growth has flatlined in the past three decades. Even as public opinion toward nuclear power has warmed, projected construction costs for new plants have soared, with a single reactor now estimated to cost as much as $12 billion. In fact, the outlook for nuclear plants looks so dire that even Wall Street banks have balked at financing them unless the government underwrites the deal.
MORE:
http://motherjones.com/environment/2010/02/
obamas-nuclear-giveaway
=========================
10. Obama pulls plug on Yucca
http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2010/
Feb-03-Wed-2010/news/34092986.html
DECISION MAY END TWO DECADES OF NATIONAL DEBATE OVER NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL IN NEVADA
By STEVE TETREAULT Feb. 03, 2010 STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the Obama administration will seek to immediately suspend licensing for the Yucca Mountain repository and within 30 days withdraw completely the bid to build a nuclear waste repository in Nevada.
The actions, coupled with a new White House budget that essentially zeroes out federal support for the site, means the end could be near on more than two decades of debate over storing radioactive spent nuclear fuel a few hours drive from Las Vegas.
"I think this is virtually it," said Marty Malsch, an attorney who has represented Nevada in lawsuits against Yucca Mountain. "But I want to see the 'it' when it happens."
Malsch said that could be sometime in March depending on when the Department of Energy follows through on its announcement to pull out the license application and it goes through legal channels at NRC.
In the front end of a one-two punch, a 2011 budget the White House sent to Congress on Monday declared the proposed nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain is "not a workable option." The budget proposed to zero out funding for the project office in the fiscal year that begins in October. Congress would need to agree to that when it writes an energy department appropriations bill later this year.
"The president has made clear that the nation needs a better solution," the White House budget office said in a book that details 54 programs to be terminated.
MORE:
http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2010/
Feb-03-Wed-2010/news/34092986.html
Compilation:
1. WATCH: My Nuclear Neighbour : The Nature of Things with David Suzuki - CBC TV – Thursday – 8 p.m.
2. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 – Saskatoon
3. Dim outlook for nuke industry
4. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 5, 2010
5. Nuclear energy unsafe
6. Ban the bomb spirit lives on
7. It's time to set course for global zero
8. No Major Nuclear Revival by 2030, Says CIGI Report
9. Obama's Nuclear Giveaway
10. Obama pulls plug on Yucca
=======================
1. WATCH: My Nuclear Neighbour : The Nature of Things with David Suzuki - CBC TV – Thursday – 8 p.m.
Mark your calendar to be sure and watch this Nature of Things documentary about how our northern Alberta friends are facing the prospect of nuclear power going in next door. It's on Thursday, February 11 at 8 p.m. on CBC TV.
Find out more at:
http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/2010/
mynuclearneighbour/
==================
2. Speaker: Peter Prebble - Climate Change, Oil Sands And The Potential To Build A Renewable Energy Society In Saskatchewan – Feb. 10.10 - Saskatoon
Where: 7 PM, J.S. Wood Library, 1801 Lansdowne Ave.
Join guest speaker Peter Prebble, Director of Energy and Water Policy for the Saskatchewan Environmental Society, as he reviews the enormous consequences of climate change, the long lived nature of greenhouse gases, and the outcome of the international negotiations at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. In that global context, he will then examine plans to develop an oil sands industry in Saskatchewan and argue for a much more cautious approach than the Saskatchewan government has taken to date. Saskatchewan should learn from Alberta’s serious mistakes and be prepared to reject unsustainable oil sands proposals. The second half of Peter’s presentation will outline concrete steps Saskatchewan can take to sharply reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and create green jobs based on a renewable energy future. Peter will make the case for major Saskatchewan investments in energy efficiency, wind power, small scale hydro, co-generation of electricity, biomass development and solar energy. He will propose a new set of public policies aimed at building a renewable energy society in Saskatchewan. The policy proposals would bring sweeping and exciting change to Saskatchewan. For more information phone 665-1915.
=====================
3. Dim outlook for nuke industry
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
760858--dim-outlook-for-nuke-industry
Tyler Hamilton,The Toronto Star, February 5, 2010 thestar.com
A coming "nuclear renaissance" is often cited by government and industry officials as reason to keep investing in Canada's nuclear-power sector. Without support, they say, the country risks being sidelined in a market poised for massive expansion.
But that growth, according to an independent report released Thursday, simply isn't happening. After 10 years of industry cheerleading, the world's fleet of nuclear reactors has become smaller.
"There has been, in fact, a decline in the contribution of nuclear power to the world electricity production, from 16.7 per cent in 2000 to 13.5 per cent in 2008," said the report, the result of a three-year study by the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Ottawa.
The centre was founded in 2002 by Jim Balsillie, co-chief executive of Research In Motion Ltd. of Waterloo.
"The industry is struggling to quickly reverse a profound stagnation that has occurred since the boom years of the 1970s and 1980s."
And it's likely to struggle for at least the next 20 years, it added. "Significant expansion of nuclear energy worldwide to 2030 faces constraints that, while not insurmountable, are likely to outweigh the drivers of nuclear energy."
Louis Fréchette, chair of the centre's "Nuclear Energy Futures" project, said the findings are based on "exhaustive" consultations with industry experts and a thorough review of industry literature.
Asked what the conclusions mean for Canada, she warned officials against making unrealistic assumptions.
"If the future of the Canadian industry rests on the major expansion of nuclear demand worldwide, then I think you have to be careful. What we're saying is that it would be wise to make prudent assumptions as to the size of the market."
MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
760858--dim-outlook-for-nuke-industry
========================
4. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 5, 2010
Top Stories
Obama administration moves to cancel Yucca dump, creates blue ribbon commission to seek "Plan B"
Background: Fulfilling a campaign pledge to Nevadans, President Barack Obama has zeroed out the Fiscal Year 2011 budget request for the proposed Yucca Mountain national repository for high-level radioactive waste disposal. Secretary Steven Chu has moved to withdraw the U.S. Department of Energy's application from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license proceeding, and has established a blue ribbon commission to report on alternatives for waste management in the next 18 to 24 months.
Our View: The 23 year long Yucca Mountain dump "illusion of a solution" to the radioactive waste crisis is finally over. Given Yucca's geologic unsuitability, and its sacredness to the Western Shoshone Indian Nation, the dump's cancellation represents a tremendous victory for the environment and for justice. But Chu's choice of name (Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future) and mission statement emphasizes atomic energy's expansion, rather than the safe management of radioactive waste, echoing Obama's State of the Union Address call for "building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country." Based on their past behavior, Chu's choice of panel members Exelon Nuclear CEO John Rowe, former Republican U.S. Senator Pete Domenici from New Mexico, and former NRC Chairman Richard Meserve raises red flags that dangerous new illusions of solutions - such as reprocessing and centralized interim storage - will very likely be advocated as alternatives to the Yucca dump.
What You Can Do: Call President Obama (202-456-1414) and Energy Secretary Chu (202-586-6210) to thank them for their wise decision to cancel the Yucca Mountain dump. Also call U.S. Senator Harry Reid (202-224-3542) and U.S. Representative Shelley Berkley (202-225-5965), both of Nevada, to thank them for their decades of leadership in stopping the Yucca Mountain dump. But be sure to quickly add that environmental organizations must be listened to by the Chu blue ribbon commission, that hardened on-site storage is urgently needed, and that reprocessing and "parking lot dumps" would make the radioactive waste problems worse, not better.
Obama's tripling of taxpayer-backed nuclear reactor loan guarantee bailouts risks nuclear weapons proliferation
Background: Following closely upon his call in the State of the Union Address for "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country," President Obama's Fiscal Year 2011 Department of Energy (DOE) budget has requested a tripling of new reactor loan guarantees. $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees for new reactors was approved by Congress and President Bush at the end of 2007 (as well as an additional $2.0 billion for new uranium enrichment facilities), but President Obama has now proposed to raise that amount to $54.5 billion. Responding to reporters at his budget roll out press conference, Energy Secretary Chu said that $54.5 billion in loan guarantees could finance 7 to 10 new atomic reactors.
Our View: We are curious to know what 7 to 10 new reactor proposals Secretary Chu and President Obama think are worthy of such high-stakes taxpayer risks. An environmental coalition press conference entitled "EXPERTS: NO GOOD CANDIDATES EXIST FOR CURRENT NUCLEAR REACTOR LOAN GUARANTEE BAILOUT FUNDS, MUCH LESS TRIPLED AMOUNT UNDER OBAMA BUDGET PLAN" has made clear, from watchdogs on the ground, that even DOE's top four candidates - supposedly the best of the nuclear power industry's applications for loan guarantees for the first $18.5 billion - are themselves very bad proposals, already suffering from cost overruns, schedule delays, and safety design flaws, long before the first shovel of dirt has been turned. In addition, Henry D. Sokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, who served on the federal Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation, and Terrorism, has warned that expanding public subsidies for an expansion of atomic power risks proliferation of nuclear weapons. Beyond Nuclear has consistently warned of the inextricable link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. Thus, President Obama's call for a tripling of nuclear loan guarantees contradicts his own praiseworthy call for a world free from nuclear weapons.
What You Can Do: Call President Obama (202-456-1414), your two U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative (via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard, 202-224-3121), and urge them to not expand the nuclear loan guarantee program, in order to avert many billions in taxpayer dollars being lost at each defaulted new reactor project, as well as to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.
Uncontrolled radiation releases still getting out of Vermont Yankee
Background: New test wells sunk around the Vermont Yankee nuclear power station have revealed rising radiation levels in groundwater on the banks of the Connecticut River near the town of Vernon, Vermont. Three 30-foot deep test wells are now in evidence of water contaminated with tritium, radioactive hydrogen, where radiation levels have now ranged from 17,000 picocuries per liter to 800,000 picocuries per liter. The Vermont Public Health Department is describing it as "a very serious situation." State officials are now looking to sample water from deeper aquifers in the bedrock under the reactor.
Our View: Today's groundwater is tomorrow's drinking water. "Tritiated water" is chemically identical to water. Only now, it is radioactive water with a half-life of 12.3 years. That means that it can pose a biological hazard for 120 years. If inhaled, ingested or absorbed, tritium will displace hydrogen molecules in the water that makes up 70% of human tissues and cells and 80% of our DNA. Carbon bonded tritium can be retained in the body for more than a year. Tritium is a clinically proven cause of cancer, birth defects and mutations with no known safe threshold. Vermont Yankee is only the latest is a series of uncontrolled radiation releases from nuclear power stations that continue to occur around the country. First discovered on January 6, 2010, the source of the now month old Yankee leak has still not been found. The reach and depth of the underground water borne radioactive plume is unknown. The nuclear industry has repeatedly been caught hiding the facts and lying about the leaks to the public and their officials. Federal regulators continue to trivialize the significance and the risks posed by these uncontrolled and unmonitored releases. And while these liquid radioactive releases to the water are garnering attention, we should be starting investigations into undisclosed radioactive gas releases from nuclear reactors as well.
What You Can Do: Your nuclear power station has anywhere from 30 to 50 buried pipes systems that carry radioactive water in a buried tangle of corroding pipes that have gone uninspected and unmaintained for decades. Industry and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission plan to study the problem for years before announcing a corrective action plan. Watch for the upcoming release of our report on this public health issue and make sure that your Congressional representatives get a copy.
Beyond Nuclear in the News
Kevin Kamps quoted in The Day, February 3, 2010, White House plan to scratch nuclear waste site plays to mixed reviews.
Linda Gunter writes in The Daily Kos, February 1, 2010 Why environmentalists must fight back against Obama's kiss to polluters (Also available via the Blog button).
Linda Gunter writes on AlterNet.org, February 2010, Imagine Haiti with radiation sickness; why we must disarm.
Paul Gunter and Kevin Kamps quoted in Rutland Herald, February 1, 2010, Unsafe at any level.
Kevin Kamps quoted Earth Times, January 29, 2010, Obama steps up nuclear energy commitment; creates commission.
Kevin Kamps quoted in Las Vegas Sun, January 30, 2010, Dying Yucca Mountain still has some life.
Kevin Kamps quoted in Die Zeit, January 30, 2010, Obama opens the way for atomic energy.
Kevin Kamps quoted in El Universal, Caracas, Venezuela, January 29, 2010, Obama promotes major use of nuclear energy.
Paul Gunter quoted in The Washington Post (By David Gramm, Associated Press), February 1, 2010. Vt nuke plant leaks renew debate over aging plants.
=======================
5. Nuclear energy unsafe
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/
Nuclear+energy+unsafe/2525073/story.html
Edmonton Journal February 5, 2010
The following is my comment on a deceptive report by the University of Alberta group, and their subsequent defence of this at the Jan. 31 forum:
It is very unfortunate that Professor Davidson and colleagues introduced this report on nuclear energy as if the problem is one of public perception and knowledge, not of what it is, the very real danger of nuclear power to human life.
Nuclear energy is radioactive material that kills upon contact; that is useful in killing cancers, but that is only a tiny amount of the result of having a functional nuclear reactor in your neighbourhood. All reactors emit radioactive effluent daily; Alberta is at the headwaters of rivers that go all across Canada; reactors are usually built on a river. Thus, we would be threatening the safety of water systems all across Canada, including the sources of drinking water.
In times of a summer drought, a reactor must take too much of the available water to keep cool enough to prevent it from exploding. That leaves inadequate water for the population.
As well, reactors age and have accidents and leaks, most recently, a leak this past week from a reactor in Vermont.
These are only two of the serious problems with nuclear power. The long-term problem of safe waste storage for the hundreds of thousands of years needed for protection from radioactive substances while they progress through their various half-lives, is one of the problems that cannot be solved. All other forms of energy sources are preferable to this deadly form of energy.
The economic and health comparisons to coal are erroneous. Both these costs, with coal, do not have to consider the hundreds of thousands of years of storage of nuclear energy. Coal, as a substance, is not itself deadly upon contact, thus, the costs of insurance and protection cannot begin to compare.
The nuclear industry spokespeople, as in the Vermont leak last week, continue to claim that there is not a known link between nuclear effluents and leaks to cancer rates. This is like the tobacco industry not taking responsibility until thousands were dead from smoke-related cancer, and the courts had to force that industry to take their responsibility for these tragedies.
The government says now that it will limit its financial involvement, but, with nuclear projects, this has not been possible for any other regions.
When nuclear problems occur and companies refuse to take financial responsibility, governments must, and the people who do not want this and realize its dangers are left to pay for the resulting problems through poorer health, sometimes early death, and higher taxes.
The report discusses probabilities in numbers of lives lost by nuclear power, as compared to other sources of damage to human health. This is deceiving, as the potential for catastrophic damage with nuclear power is unparalleled with anything presently known.
Why is the government of Alberta willing to jeopardize lives for something that could be accomplished in much safer ways?
The public is right to remind the government and these university professors that this project does not belong in Alberta.
Janet E. Smith, Edmonton
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
===========================
6. Ban the bomb spirit lives on
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
760235--ban-the-bomb-spirit-lives-on
Toronto Star, Thursday, Feb 4 2010
The Ban the Bomb movement isn't dead. It strutted its stuff in Paris this week at a conference of nuclear activists, under the banner of the Global Zero campaign. Delegates recalled the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and made the case for a world rid of nuclear weapons.
They also won friends in high places.
Both U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev sent welcome messages of support to the international assembly of politicians, diplomats, generals, business leaders, clerics, academics and arms experts.
Obama reaffirmed his campaign promise that "a world without nuclear weapons . . . is one of my highest priorities." That vision, however long-term, matters. Obama and Medvedev control 95 per cent of the world's 23,000 nukes. They can make change happen.
The Global Zero conference, which wraps up today, also enjoys the support of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Jimmy Carter, Mikhail Gorbachev and other well-known figures. "Every dollar spent on weapons is one less spent on schools, life-saving medicine, or research into life-affirming technologies," Ban said this week in a
video message to the gathering.
As Nobel laureate John Polanyi wrote on the Star's Opinion page last Sunday, there's nothing utopian about disarmament. The Americans and Russians got rid of 50,000 nuclear weapons as the Cold War faded. What's needed is the political will to go much further. Global Zero is "the pole to which our compasses should point," Polanyi says.
The Paris meeting was well-timed. Obama and Medvedev are finalizing a major new treaty to scrap 2,000 of the 5,000 strategic (long-range) warheads they have in their stockpiles. That adds to the moral pressure on North Korea and Iran to scrap their nascent programs.
As momentum builds, Global Zero will focus its attention on cutting the more than 20,000 remaining strategic and tactical nuclear weapons held by the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France, Israel, India and Pakistan. One sensible measure boosts hopes for another.
MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
760235--ban-the-bomb-spirit-lives-on
==========================
7. It's time to set course for global zero
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/
its-time-to-set-the-course-for-global-zero/article1455374/
A bold initiative to eliminate nuclear weapons merits more than a chilly French politeness
by Timothy Garton Ash, Globe and Mail, Wednesday, Feb. 3, 2010
PARIS — “Peaceniks” is not the word that comes to mind as you contemplate this array of smartly dressed current and former presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers, generals and ambassadors, their neat if thinning coiffures reflected in the gilded mirrors of an ornate hall in one of Paris's grand hotels. Yet, they have come together to advance a goal as ambitious as any pony-tailed peacenik ever had: the total elimination of all nuclear weapons by 2030. Global zero.
The obstacles along the road to zero are enormous. They include the country in which we sit. France's approach recalls the name of one of its nuclear submarines: L'Inflexible . As the head of the French foreign service told this audience, nuclear deterrence had served his country well for half a century.
Russia has joined with the U.S. in supporting the initiative, in principle, and envisaging further big cuts in their still outsize nuclear arsenals. But if the U.S. Senate were to demand the introduction of a modernized nuclear weapon as its price for ratifying a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia, there would be angry Russian voices asking what was going on.
The smaller the nuclear arsenals become, the heavier America's superiority in so-called conventional weaponry would appear to weigh. Although this is a cosmopolitan gathering, the driving voices here are American. Suspicious Russians and Chinese will say there is a reason for that.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/
its-time-to-set-the-course-for-global-zero/article1455374/
=========================
8. No Major Nuclear Revival by 2030, Says CIGI Report
http://au.sys-con.com/node/1273879
Global nuclear governance nevertheless needs improving
Marketwire, Thu Feb 4 2010
WATERLOO, CANADA--(Marketwire - Feb. 4, 2010) - A significant expansion of nuclear energy worldwide is unlikely to occur before 2030. This provides a window of opportunity to urgently fix the currently inadequate system for governing nuclear energy to avoid accidents, nuclear terrorism and weapons proliferation.
These are the key findings of the three-and-a-half year Nuclear Energy Futures project released today by The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Ottawa. The project was unique in considering together the normally 'stove-piped' subjects of nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation. Nuclear Energy and Global Governance to 2030 reports the findings of the three-and-a-half year Nuclear Energy Futures project. Flowing from the findings is the project's five-point Action Plan for policymakers in Canada and abroad.
"Concerns about nuclear terrorism and weapons proliferation will be the focus of several important international gatherings in the coming months, including the G-8 Summit. The proposed Action Plan points to concrete steps that can be taken to make the world safer for nuclear energy," said Madame Louise Frechette, chair of the Nuclear Energy Futures project and a distinguished fellow at CIGI.
The report argues that a significant expansion of nuclear energy is unlikely to happen before 2030, due to a number of constraints on the plans of both existing and aspiring nuclear energy states. "Despite some powerful drivers, a revival of nuclear energy faces too many barriers compared to other means of generating electricity," states Trevor Findlay, director of the project and author of the report.
Barriers that present challenges to the revival of nuclear energy are:
. . . . .
MORE: http://au.sys-con.com/node/1273879
========================
9. Obama's Nuclear Giveaway
http://motherjones.com/environment/2010/02/
obamas-nuclear-giveaway
Buried in the budget is a plan to underwrite the nuclear industry’s revival.
By Kate Sheppard | Thu Feb. 4, 2010 3:00 AM PST
In September 2007, the city of San Antonio and NRG Energy announced a partnership to build two new nuclear reactors—the first new nuclear project to be initiated in the United States in decades. The project represented, one of the partners promised, "a milestone for our long-term energy future [1]."
The project, initially estimated to cost $5.8 billion, quickly became a leading candidate for a Department of Energy (DOE) program in which the government would guarantee loans to finance new nuclear plants. In less than a year, however, the plant's projected cost had more than doubled to $13 billion. By April 2009, an independent report had calculated that the real cost [2] of the plant could be as high as $22 billion. In December, San Antonio's municipal utility, CPS, announced it was bailing out of the venture entirely and suing NRG, arguing that NRG and Toshiba—which was contracted to construct the reactors—had lied about the price tag of the venture.
After this debacle, one would think the government would be wary about underwriting projects with such dicey finances. Yet the Obama administration's 2011 budget proposes tripling the loan guarantee program—from the $18.5 billion that Congress has already approved to $54.5 billion. The program's expansion is just one of several signs that the Obama administration is throwing its muscle behind the nuclear industry's push for a massive expansion.
"We are aggressively pursuing nuclear energy," said Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Monday when he rolled out the department's budget proposal. Several days earlier, Chu had unveiled a blue-ribbon panel to assess nuclear waste disposal, seen as one of the most significant barriers to a nuclear revival. And in his State of the Union address Obama argued that creating new clean energy jobs "means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country."
But as Mother Jones has reported [3], there will be no nuclear renaissance unless the US taxpayer covers the tab. While the country's 104 nuclear power plants currently produce nearly 20 percent of American electricity, growth has flatlined in the past three decades. Even as public opinion toward nuclear power has warmed, projected construction costs for new plants have soared, with a single reactor now estimated to cost as much as $12 billion. In fact, the outlook for nuclear plants looks so dire that even Wall Street banks have balked at financing them unless the government underwrites the deal.
MORE:
http://motherjones.com/environment/2010/02/
obamas-nuclear-giveaway
=========================
10. Obama pulls plug on Yucca
http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2010/
Feb-03-Wed-2010/news/34092986.html
DECISION MAY END TWO DECADES OF NATIONAL DEBATE OVER NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL IN NEVADA
By STEVE TETREAULT Feb. 03, 2010 STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the Obama administration will seek to immediately suspend licensing for the Yucca Mountain repository and within 30 days withdraw completely the bid to build a nuclear waste repository in Nevada.
The actions, coupled with a new White House budget that essentially zeroes out federal support for the site, means the end could be near on more than two decades of debate over storing radioactive spent nuclear fuel a few hours drive from Las Vegas.
"I think this is virtually it," said Marty Malsch, an attorney who has represented Nevada in lawsuits against Yucca Mountain. "But I want to see the 'it' when it happens."
Malsch said that could be sometime in March depending on when the Department of Energy follows through on its announcement to pull out the license application and it goes through legal channels at NRC.
In the front end of a one-two punch, a 2011 budget the White House sent to Congress on Monday declared the proposed nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain is "not a workable option." The budget proposed to zero out funding for the project office in the fiscal year that begins in October. Congress would need to agree to that when it writes an energy department appropriations bill later this year.
"The president has made clear that the nation needs a better solution," the White House budget office said in a book that details 54 programs to be terminated.
MORE:
http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2010/
Feb-03-Wed-2010/news/34092986.html
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 14.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:25 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 14.10
Compilation:
1. Urgent: Two petitions for a moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec
2. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network or Online
3. Cameco’s Progress at Cigar Lake
4. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker Plus Letter: Hughes: Cameco’s CEO is thinking?!
5. Local Nuclear War --Global Suffering - Scientific American
6. No Nukes – an essay by Ralph Nader
7. Europe's Five "Undeclared Nuclear Weapons States"
8. Obama DOE to grant first new atomic reactor federal loan guarantee to Plant Vogtle in Georgia
9. A Quarter of U.S. Nuclear Plants Are Leaking a Radioactive Material Linked to Cancer
10. Yankee terrorists...Letter: Hoffman - Feb. 14.10
11. Despite billions spent on cleanup, Hanford won't be clean for thousands of years
12. Experts challenge ability to deal with new nuclear wastes
13. Canada’s Climate Policy: Made by …
=========================
1. Urgent: Two petitions for a moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 2:13 PM
Subject: Correction: Two petitions for a moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec
IN MY PREVIOUS E-MAIL I INDICATED THAT THESE PETITIONS ARE CALLING FOR A MORATORIUM ON URANIUM MINING IN (1) THE NORTH SHORE DISTRACT AND (2) IN ALL OF QUEBEC.
IN FACT, THE SECOND PETITION IS MUCH BROADER IN THAT IT ALSO CALLS FOR THE SHUT-DOWN OF QUEBEC'S ONLY NUCLEAR REACTOR, A HALT TO THE HYDRO-QUEBEC'S PURCHASE OF THE POINTE LEPREAU REACTOR IN NEW BRUNSWICK, AND AN EMPHASIS ON CREATING EXPERTISE IN THE FIELD OF RADIOACTIVE DEMOLITION (DISMANTLING RADIOACTIVE STRUCTURES SUCH AS SHUT-DOWN REACTORS).
FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE I HAVE MADE AN UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION OF EACH OF THE TWO PETITIONS (SEE BELOW).
Gordon Edwards
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
More info (au francais)
http://www.ledevoir.com/economie/actual ... onomiques/
278773/pour-un-moratoire-sur-les-mines-d-uranium-au-quebec
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
PETITION #1 (Unofficial Translation)
http://www.assnat.qc.ca/petition/Signer ... etition=93
WHEREAS there are ongoing exploration activities near Lake Kachiwiss in order to determine the potential for uranium mining ;
WHEREAS Lake Kachiwiss is located less than thirteen kilometers from Lake Rapide qhich is the source of drinking water for the City of Sept-Îles ;
WHEREAS numerous doctors and health professionals believe that the exploration for and the mining of uranium pose elevated health risks ;
WHEREAS a multitude of rigorous scientific studies conclude that exposure to radon poses elevated health risks ;
WHEREAS the City of Sept-Îles has passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on uranium mining ;
WHEREAS the Regional Municipal Council of the North-Shore supports this request for a moratorium ;
WHEREAS the current exploration activities have triggered an outcry from the population of Sept-Îles and of the North Shore ;
THEREFORE the undersigned call upon the National Assembly to order an immediate halt to the exploration activities now being undertaken north of Sept-Îles and to declare a moratorium on the exploration and mining of uranium in this district.
~ ~ ~ ~
PETITION #2 (Unofficial Translation)
http://www.assnat.qc.ca/petition/Signer ... etition=95
WHEREAS Quebec's Law on Mines is currently being revised ;
WHEREAS the National Assembly has adopted a resolution prohibiting radioactive wastes from outside the province to be buried on Quebec territory ;
WHEREAS Hydro-Quebec intends to proceed with the reconstruction of the Gentilly-2 nuclear reactor in Quebec, and the acquisition of the Pointe Lepreau reactor in New Brunswick -- both of them CANDU-6 reactors -- without any public hearings ;
WHEREAS the outdated CANDU-6 technology emits radioactive tritium which is linked to an increased risk of leukemia and congenital illnesses ;
WHEREAS the exploration for and mining of uranium contaminates sources of drinking water and gives off a radioactive gas (radon), which is the second largest cause of lung cancer after tobacco ;
WHEREAS the nuclear wastes from reactors and from uranium mines remain radioactive for millions of years, contaminate the environment and pose elevated health risks for the population ;
WHEREAS the export of uranium may contravene the international Non-Proliferation Treaty and, if the case arises, may contribute to war crimes and crimes against humanity ;
WHEREAS the costs and the risks of nuclear energy make it undesirable in comparison with other types of energy: hydroelectric, wind power, geomthermal, and solar energy ;
THEREFORE the undersigned urge the government:
• To abandon the purchase of the Pointe Lepreau reactor ;
• To close and dismantle the Gentilly-2 nuclear reactor ;
• To declare a moratorium on all exploration and mining of uranium in Quebec ; and
• To develop an expertise in nuclear demolition which would make Quebec a world leader in this emerging field of technology.
=============================
2. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network or Online
Online: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/
The_Nature_of_Things/ID=1410952626
Imagine that one morning you wake up to find out your next-door neighbour may be a nuclear power plant.
There was a time when we thought atomic power would solve all our energy needs. That promise lost its lustre in cost overruns, accidents and cover-ups. Now after decades of fading into the background the nuclear power industry is poised for a comeback. In Canada, and around the world, the nuclear industry is rebranding itself as the only practical solution to global warming.
This is a story of global importance – it’s also a very local story. It’s a tale of two small towns: one in rural Ontario that has been a centre of nuclear power almost as long as there has been nuclear power. The other is in the legendary Peace country of Northern Alberta, where residents woke up one day to hear that Alberta’s first nuclear power facility might be moving in next door.
We travel with Lorraine Jensen and Brenda McSween from their farms in Peace River, Alberta to Kincardine, Ontario searching for answers to questions that are dividing their once harmonious community.
My Nuclear Neighbour is written and produced by Donna and Daniel Zuckerbrot for Reel Time Images.
The episode focuses on Bruce Power's efforts to build new reactors in the Peace River region of Alberta, Canada. Bruce Power owns and operates the largest nuclear power plant in North America, and the second biggest in the world, on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, just 50 miles from Michigan. The program will feature Montreal-based Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, who, along with Michael Keegan of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes of Monroe, Michigan co-chairs the Great Lakes United Nuclear-Free/Green Energy Task Force, upon which Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps has served for a decade.
=========================
3. Cameco’s Progress at Cigar Lake
a) Cameco Re-enters Underground Development at Cigar Lake
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cameco ... _news_stmp
press release Feb. 11, 2010, 10:23 a.m. EST ·
SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN, Feb 11, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- ALL AMOUNTS ARE STATED IN CDN $ (UNLESS NOTED)
Cameco Corporation /quotes/comstock/11t!cco (CA:CCO 29.07, -0.36, -1.22%) /quotes/comstock/13*!ccj/quotes/nls/ccj (CCJ 27.71, +0.15, +0.54%) announced today that crews safely re-entered the main working level of the Cigar Lake mine, 480 metres below surface, on February 10, 2010.
Prior to re-entry, the mine was fully dewatered and the main shaft refurbished including installation of the ladderway, replacement of electrical and mechanical components, and extension of the in-shaft pumping system. The workings at the 420 metre level, where the last inflow occurred, have been inspected and secured.
Safe access to the 480 metre level has been established and work to inspect, assess and secure the underground development has begun. This work will be followed by restoration of underground mine systems and infrastructure in preparation for resumed construction activities.
"Resuming work underground is a key milestone for the Cigar Lake project," said Cameco's president and CEO Jerry Grandey. "We have incorporated the knowledge gained in the Athabasca Basin to systematically and diligently manage this project as we move toward our goal of safe, reliable production."
MORE:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cameco ... _news_stmp
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
b) Progress made at Cigar Lake
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Progress+made+Cigar+Lake/2553569/story.html
Crews reach level 480 metres below surface
By Cassandra Kyle, The StarPhoenix February 12, 2010
The underground workings of Cameco Corp.'s troubled Cigar Lake uranium mine are expected to be secured prior to October, the company said Thursday as it announced workers had reached 480 metres below surface level of the mine earlier in the week.
However, the Saskatoon-based company cautioned that securing the underground workings of the world's largest undeveloped high-grade uranium deposit will depend on the condition of the mine. For now, crews can set foot on the 480-metre level of the de-watered site and the company should be able to get a better idea of the state of the underground environment.
"Resuming work underground is a key milestone for the Cigar Lake project," said Jerry Grandey, Cameco's president and CEO. "We have incorporated the knowledge gained in the Athabasca Basin to systematically and diligently manage this project as we move toward our goal of safe, reliable production."
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Progress+made+Cigar+Lake/2553569/story.html
===========================
4. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker Plus Letter: Hughes: Cameco’s CEO is thinking?!
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/deep+thinker/
2520409/story.html
BY CASSANDRA KYLE, THE STARPHOENIX FEBRUARY 4, 2010
ameco Corp. CEO Jerry Grandey has made doubling uranium production a goal of the company
As president and CEO of Cameco Corp., Jerry Grandey is no stranger to spending time in airports.
The Saskatoon-based business leader often jets away to engagements relatively close to home in North America, or as far away as India, where the company recently opened an office.
Last Friday, Grandey spent a few minutes inside the Prince Albert airport. That's where StarPhoenix business reporter Cassandra Kyle asked Cameco's CEO five questions about the company's future.
SP: When would you like to see production begin at Cigar Lake?
JG: Well, I think the answer to that is as soon as possible. We're now down the shaft well over 400 metres and we're getting a glimpse of some of the underground workings. We haven't put our feet down there yet, but from the cage we're able to kind of look around.
But only when we're finally able to walk through the underground workings and see what the condition is from being underwater, now a little over three years, are we going to be able to answer that question.
We're making great progress. There's a lot of innovation, a lot of creativity that goes on up there every day to try and move it forward as fast as we can.
SP: Cameco raised hundreds of millions of dollars (on the market) in 2009. Will the company be announcing any acquisitions soon?
JG: The principle focus is on doubling production from where it is today at about 21 million pounds up to 40, and we really intend to do that with properties and assets that we already control, not just in Canada but in Australia as well as in Kazakhstan, and we believe that from our own cash flow and resources that development, that doubling of production, can get funded.
Having said that, we're always looking for opportunities where we believe that if we did an acquisition, we could add value to Cameco within the nuclear sphere. We've been quite active with vertical integration over the last few years in conversion and enrichment but, at the same time, as we demonstrated with the Australian acquisition of the Kintyre mine, when we identify an opportunity that we think can add value, we're prepared to compete and acquire it.
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/deep+thinker/
2520409/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Letter: Hughes: Cameco’s CEO is ‘thinking’?!
Sent for publishing February 13, 2010
Dear Editor at Star Phoenix:
Cameco’s CEO is ‘thinking’?!
Re: Progress made at Cigar Lake, SP, Feb. 12, 2010
Unfortunately, we will probably never know what happened to the billions of gallons of radioactive water pumped out of this mine. Did it end up in the nearest lake?
Believe it: federal regulations now give some mining projects the green light to do that these days . . the old out-of-sight-out-of-mind disposal system!
One would hope that Cameco's deep-thinking CEO would actually do a little thinking beyond his next bonus!
Such as, THINK: how will the contaminated ground water in and around this hole in the ground affect the future health of humans and wildlife?
How about THINK: what about my grandchildren and their grandchildren???
Or, THINK: of Cameco's enduring gift to the world in the form of DU-contaminated soldiers and civilians (and deformed babies born to them) - wherever SK uranium is used in past and future invasions of other countries!
Will Cameco leave the uranium in the ground? Not a chance!
Disgustingly, Cameco will continue the same outdated, thoughtless, visionless mentality as they move towards their ‘goal of safe, reliable production’ of this lethal substance.
How future generations, knowing that Cameco knew of the dangers, will thank them!
Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK
=========================
5. Local Nuclear War --Global Suffering - Scientific American
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/
RobockToonSciAmJan2010.pdf
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 3:49 PM
Friends,
Scientific American recently published, in its January, 2010 edition, an important article on the environmental consequences of nuclear war; it is entitled, "Local Nuclear War: Global Suffering".
It focuses upon a war fought between India and Pakistan in which 100 nuclear weapons are detonated in their mega cities, and makes it clear that deadly climate change and massive ozone destruction following such a war could kill up to 1 billion people from nuclear famine.
It also discusses the consequences of a larger war fought with strategic nuclear weapons, which would likely end human history.
For the complete PDF file, please go to
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/R ... an2010.pdf
I highly recommend this story.
This information should be used to create a sense of urgency in the general discussion of nuclear abolition. Steven Starr
======================
6. No Nukes – an essay by Ralph Nader
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/13
by Ralph Nader, Saturday, February 13, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
A generation of Americans has grown up without a single nuclear power plant being brought on line since before the near meltdown of the Three Mile Island structure in 1979. They have not been exposed to the enormous costs, risks and national security dangers associated with their operations and the large amount of radioactive wastes still without a safe, permanent storage place for tens of thousands of years.
All Americans better get informed soon, for a resurgent atomic power lobby wants the taxpayers to pick up the tab for relaunching this industry. Unless you get Congress to stop this insanely dirty and complex way to boil water to generate steam for electricity, you'll be paying for the industry's research, the industry's loan guarantees and the estimated
trillion dollars (inflation-adjusted) cost of just one meltdown, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, plus vast immediate and long-range casualties.
The Russian roulette-playing nuclear industry claims a class nine meltdown will never happen. That none of the thousands of rail cars, trucks and barges with radioactive wastes will ever have a catastrophic accident. That terrorists will forgo striking a nuclear plant or hijacking deadly materials, and go for far less consequential disasters.
The worst nuclear reactor accident occurred in 1986 at Chernobyl in what is now Ukraine. Although of a different design than most U.S. reactors, the resultant breach of containment released a radioactive cloud that spread around the globe but concentrated most intensively in Belarus, Ukraine and European Russia and secondarily over 40% of Europe.
For different reasons, both governmental and commercial interests were intent on downplaying both the immediate radioactively-caused deaths and diseases and the longer term devastations from this silent, invisible form of violence. They also were not eager to fund follow up monitoring and research.
Now comes the English translation of the most comprehensive, scientific report to date titled Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment whose senior author is biologist Alexey V. Yablokov, a member of the prestigious Russian Academy of Sciences.
Purchasable from the New York Academy of Sciences (visit nyas.org/annals), this densely referenced analysis covers the acute radiation inflicted on both the first-responders (called "liquidators") and on residents nearby, who suffer chronic
radioactive sicknesses. "Today," asserts the report, "more than 6 million people live on land with dangerous levels of contamination--land that will continue to be contaminated for decades to centuries."
Back to the U.S., where, deplorably, President Obama has called for more so-called "safe, clean nuclear power plants." He just sent a budget request for another $54 billion in taxpayer loan guarantees on top of a previous $18 billion passed under Bush. You see, Wall Street financiers will not loan electric companies money to build new nuclear plants which cost $12 billion and up, unless Uncle Sam guarantees one hundred percent of the loan.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/13
=======================
7. Europe's Five "Undeclared Nuclear Weapons States"
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17550
Are Turkey, Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands and Italy Nuclear Powers?
By Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, February 12, 2010
According to a recent report, former NATO Secretary-General George Robertson confirmed that Turkey possesses 40-90 "Made in America" nuclear weapons at the Incirlik military base.(en.trend.az/)
Does this mean that Turkey is a nuclear power?
"Far from making Europe safer, and far from producing a less nuclear dependent Europe, [the policy] may well end up bringing more nuclear weapons into the European continent, and frustrating some of the attempts that are being made to get multilateral nuclear disarmament," (Former NATO Secretary-General George Robertson quoted in Global Security, February 10, 2010)
"'Is Italy capable of delivering a thermonuclear strike?...
Could the Belgians and the Dutch drop hydrogen bombs on enemy targets?...
Germany's air force couldn't possibly be training to deliver bombs 13 times more powerful than the one that destroyed Hiroshima, could it?...
Nuclear bombs are stored on air-force bases in Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands and planes from each of those countries are capable of delivering them." ("What to Do About Europe's Secret Nukes." Time Magazine, December 2, 2009)
The "Official" Nuclear Weapons States
Five countries, the US, UK, France, China and Russia are considered to be "nuclear weapons states" (NWS), "an internationally recognized status conferred by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)". Three other "Non NPT countries" (i.e. non-signatory states of the NPT) including India, Pakistan and North Korea, have recognized possessing nuclear weapons.
MORE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17550
(SEE DETAILS & MAP:
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/euro/euro_pt1.pdf )
=========================
8. Obama DOE to grant first new atomic reactor federal loan guarantee to Plant Vogtle in Georgia
http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2010/2/12/
obama-doe-to-grant-first-new-atomic-reactor-federal-loan-gua.html
February 12, 2010 admin
Dow Jones Newswires has reported, according to sources close to the matter, that the Obama administration's U.S. Department of Energy has decided to grant the first federal taxpayer backed nuclear loan guarantee to the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia. Beyond Nuclear immediately issued a media release, denouncing this transfer of financial risk onto U.S. taxpayers, as well as this creation of radiological risk through DOE financing a reactor design which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission just last October cited as having a major safety flaw. Call President Obama at the White House comment line (202-456-1111) to register your disapproval, then call your two U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative (via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard, 202-224-3121) to urge them to block President Obama's recent request to triple the nuclear loan guarantee program fund from $18.5 billion to $54.5 billion for financing new reactor construction which otherwise private investors would refuse to touch. Avenging Angels' graphic to the left (used with permission) graced the May 12, 2008 cover of The Nation Magazine, which featured Christian Parenti's excellent article "What Nuclear Renaissance?" As the "Burning Money" graphic indicates, any nuclear power relapse in the U.S. can only be carried out at taxpayers' financial, as well as radiological, risk.
Article originally appeared on Beyond Nuclear
(http://www.beyondnuclear.org/).
===============================
9. A Quarter of U.S. Nuclear Plants Are Leaking a Radioactive Material Linked to Cancer
By Harvey Wasserma
n, AlterNet
Posted on February 12, 2010, Printed on February 13, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/story/145663/
Like a decayed flotilla of rickety steamers, at least 27 of America's 104 aging atomic reactors are known to be leaking radioactive tritium, which is linked to cancer if inhaled or ingested through the throat or skin.
The fallout has been fiercest at Vermont Yankee, where a flood of cover-ups has infuriated and terrified near neighbors who say the reactor was never meant to operate more than 30 years, and must now shut.
In 2007 one of Yankee's 22 cooling towers simply collapsed due to rot.
Now the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has confirmed tritium levels in a monitoring well at Vernon to be 3.5 times the federal safety standard. The leaks apparently came from underground pipes whose very existence was recently denied by VY officials in under-oath testimony at a public hearing. Vermont's pro-nuclear Republican Governor Jim Douglas has termed the event "a breach of trust that cannot be tolerated."
Yankee is owned by Entergy, a Mississippi-based consortium that also owns New York's Indian Point reactor, which suffered an internal gusher of radioactive water in May, 2009. Another leak has just been found at Oconee in South Carolina. Illinois' Braidwood leaked so many millions of gallons of tritium-laced water that its owner, Exelon, was forced to buy a new municipal water system for a nearby town.
Entergy says none of Yankee's tritium has been found in local drinking water or in the Connecticut River, which supplies the plant's cooling water. Vernon sits near Vermont's southeast border with Massachusetts, across the river from New Hampshire. "The existence of tritium in such low levels does not present a risk to public health or safety whatsoever," says the company's Robert Williams.
But VY is just the latest of more than two dozen U.S. nuclear plants---many built in the 1960s and '70s---to be found with leaking tritium.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145663/
~ ~ ~ ~
US Tritium leaks
http://www.nuclearwasteadvisory.co.uk/p ... &preview=0
US Tritium leaks...Radioactive tritium, a carcinogen discovered in potentially dangerous levels in groundwater at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, now taints at least 27 of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors raising concerns about how it is escaping from the aging nuclear plants. The leaks many from deteriorating underground pipes come as the nuclear industry is seeking and obtaining federal license renewals, casting itself as a clean-green alternative to power plants that burn fossil fuels.
CBS 1st Feb 2010
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/01/national/
main6163433.shtml
======================
12. Yankee terrorists...Letter: Hoffman - Feb. 14.10
http://www.acehoffman.blogspot.com/
Dear Readers,
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant is leaking copious quantities of tritium, a relatively rare (in nature) and extremely hazardous radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Tritium can be absorbed through the skin, as well as ingested or inhaled.
Water from test wells around the Vermont Yankee reactor has over 2 million picoCuries of tritium per liter -- more than 100 times the legal limit set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for tritium in drinking water, which is 20,000 picoCuries of tritium per liter (20,000 picoCuries equals about 740 radioactive decays per second (740 Becquerel ("Bq")).
Two million picoCuries per liter is nearly as poisonous as the 2.7 million picoCuries per liter that occurs in the chemical brew of a nuclear reactor's primary coolant loop.
Nuclear reactor operators are allowed to release a small fraction of a teaspoon of tritium offsite per year. But even that tiny amount must be diluted in billions of gallons of water to meet the legal standards for drinking water. If the water in your body was polluted with tritium at the legal limit, it would contain about 400 times the average concentration of tritium in the human body.
MORE: http://www.acehoffman.blogspot.com/
===========================
11. Despite billions spent on cleanup, Hanford won't be clean for thousands of years
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/
despite_billions_spent_on_clea.html
By Scott Learn, The Oregonian, February 09, 2010
Some radioactive contaminants at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will threaten the Columbia River for thousands of years, a new analysis projects, despite the multibillion-dollar cleanup efforts by the federal government.
The U.S. Department of Energy projections come from a new analysis of how best to clean up leaking storage tanks and manage waste at Hanford, a former nuclear weapons production site on 586 square miles next to the Columbia in southeastern Washington.
Public hearing
An open house and public hearing on the U.S. Department of Energy's draft environmental impact statement for cleaning up storage tanks and managing waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will start at 6 p.m. Wednesday at the Portland Double Tree Hotel at Lloyd Center, 1000 N.E. Multnomah St.
Oregon officials say the results, including contamination projections for the next 10,000 years, indicate the federal government needs to clean up more of the waste that has already leaked and spilled at Hanford instead of capping and leaving it, a less-expensive alternative.
"We think it should force a re-look at the long-term cleanup plan at Hanford," said Ken Niles, assistant director of the Oregon Department of Energy. "We don't want that level of contamination reaching the Columbia River."
The analysis also shows that the U.S. energy department's plan to import low-level and midlevel radioactive waste from other sites to Hanford after 2022 poses "completely unacceptable" risks, Niles said. Washington is also raising concerns about importing more waste.
The government holds a public hearing Wednesday in Portland on the draft environmental impact statement for tank closure and waste management. Public comments are open through March 19.
Health risks from Hanford's contamination are long-term, not immediate. They're expressed in terms of cancer cases after a lifetime of drinking well water from the site, with a one in 10,000 risk considered high. But many of the contaminant levels at the site exceed health benchmarks by wide margins.
Exposure to lower-volume contaminants with long radioactive half lives, including isotopes of plutonium, iodine and technetium, is projected to get worse over time in some parts of the site as contamination -- most from the 1950s and 1960s -- migrates in groundwater, the analysis indicates.
In the report, the energy department says its preference is to remove and process 99 percent of the contamination in the tanks, excavate about 15 feet underneath them, then cap the site -- an approach that would leave much of the leaked contamination still in the environment. It also favors covering contaminated ditches at the tank farms instead of excavating them.
MORE: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/
despite_billions_spent_on_clea.html
======================
12. Experts challenge ability to deal with new nuclear wastes
http://www.nuclearwasteadvisory.co.uk/page.asp?Id=533
Uranium Intelligence Weekly, 19 January 2010
UNITED KINGDOM
The government's draft nuclear National Policy Statement (NPS) received its most sustained attack this week, as a group of nuclear experts challenged the NPS finding that 'effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations" (UIW Nov.16, p6).
Not true, said the Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates in a lengthy submission to the House of Commons.
The research may simply not be able to provide a solution, the group argued, and 'the Government's confidence that effective arrangements to dispose of waste from new reactors will exist is premature."
MORE: http://www.nuclearwasteadvisory.co.uk/page.asp?Id=533
====================
13. Canada’s Climate Policy: Made by …
http://salmonarm.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/
canadas-climate-policy-made-by/
February 12, 2010
… the U.S., Alberta or all of Canada?
Marlo Raynolds, the Executive Director of the Pembina Institute, provides a commentary on conflicting Canadian provincial and petroleum interests in Congress vs. Parliament: Who will decide Canada’s climate policy? (Feb. 8th 2010).
“ …leaked memos suggest the government’s plan includes giving special treatment to the oilsands, effectively giving the biggest polluters a special licence to pollute and then making other Canadians pay more to meet our national emission reduction target.”
The article references the Pembina Institute’s report Climate Leadership, Economic Prosperity which has been described as:
… the first Canadian study of its kind to show regional impacts on employment and gross domestic product, and the first to comprehensively examine how Canada can meet a greenhouse gas reduction target for 2020 that goes beyond the federal government’s target.
In Raynold’s own words,
“An equitable and balanced approach to addressing climate change, as advocated by the Pembina Institute, has been summarily rejected by Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, the Harper government and the lobbyists at the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers — but we’ve yet to see a credible alternative.”
The article is a good segway to a thought-provoking report that is neither radical nor doom and gloom. Canada can have growth and an effective climate policy but not if we listen mainly to the oil industry or wait for the brokering involved with US politics.
Go Canada Go!
Compilation:
1. Urgent: Two petitions for a moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec
2. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network or Online
3. Cameco’s Progress at Cigar Lake
4. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker Plus Letter: Hughes: Cameco’s CEO is thinking?!
5. Local Nuclear War --Global Suffering - Scientific American
6. No Nukes – an essay by Ralph Nader
7. Europe's Five "Undeclared Nuclear Weapons States"
8. Obama DOE to grant first new atomic reactor federal loan guarantee to Plant Vogtle in Georgia
9. A Quarter of U.S. Nuclear Plants Are Leaking a Radioactive Material Linked to Cancer
10. Yankee terrorists...Letter: Hoffman - Feb. 14.10
11. Despite billions spent on cleanup, Hanford won't be clean for thousands of years
12. Experts challenge ability to deal with new nuclear wastes
13. Canada’s Climate Policy: Made by …
=========================
1. Urgent: Two petitions for a moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 2:13 PM
Subject: Correction: Two petitions for a moratorium on uranium mining in Quebec
IN MY PREVIOUS E-MAIL I INDICATED THAT THESE PETITIONS ARE CALLING FOR A MORATORIUM ON URANIUM MINING IN (1) THE NORTH SHORE DISTRACT AND (2) IN ALL OF QUEBEC.
IN FACT, THE SECOND PETITION IS MUCH BROADER IN THAT IT ALSO CALLS FOR THE SHUT-DOWN OF QUEBEC'S ONLY NUCLEAR REACTOR, A HALT TO THE HYDRO-QUEBEC'S PURCHASE OF THE POINTE LEPREAU REACTOR IN NEW BRUNSWICK, AND AN EMPHASIS ON CREATING EXPERTISE IN THE FIELD OF RADIOACTIVE DEMOLITION (DISMANTLING RADIOACTIVE STRUCTURES SUCH AS SHUT-DOWN REACTORS).
FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE I HAVE MADE AN UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION OF EACH OF THE TWO PETITIONS (SEE BELOW).
Gordon Edwards
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
More info (au francais)
http://www.ledevoir.com/economie/actual ... onomiques/
278773/pour-un-moratoire-sur-les-mines-d-uranium-au-quebec
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
PETITION #1 (Unofficial Translation)
http://www.assnat.qc.ca/petition/Signer ... etition=93
WHEREAS there are ongoing exploration activities near Lake Kachiwiss in order to determine the potential for uranium mining ;
WHEREAS Lake Kachiwiss is located less than thirteen kilometers from Lake Rapide qhich is the source of drinking water for the City of Sept-Îles ;
WHEREAS numerous doctors and health professionals believe that the exploration for and the mining of uranium pose elevated health risks ;
WHEREAS a multitude of rigorous scientific studies conclude that exposure to radon poses elevated health risks ;
WHEREAS the City of Sept-Îles has passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on uranium mining ;
WHEREAS the Regional Municipal Council of the North-Shore supports this request for a moratorium ;
WHEREAS the current exploration activities have triggered an outcry from the population of Sept-Îles and of the North Shore ;
THEREFORE the undersigned call upon the National Assembly to order an immediate halt to the exploration activities now being undertaken north of Sept-Îles and to declare a moratorium on the exploration and mining of uranium in this district.
~ ~ ~ ~
PETITION #2 (Unofficial Translation)
http://www.assnat.qc.ca/petition/Signer ... etition=95
WHEREAS Quebec's Law on Mines is currently being revised ;
WHEREAS the National Assembly has adopted a resolution prohibiting radioactive wastes from outside the province to be buried on Quebec territory ;
WHEREAS Hydro-Quebec intends to proceed with the reconstruction of the Gentilly-2 nuclear reactor in Quebec, and the acquisition of the Pointe Lepreau reactor in New Brunswick -- both of them CANDU-6 reactors -- without any public hearings ;
WHEREAS the outdated CANDU-6 technology emits radioactive tritium which is linked to an increased risk of leukemia and congenital illnesses ;
WHEREAS the exploration for and mining of uranium contaminates sources of drinking water and gives off a radioactive gas (radon), which is the second largest cause of lung cancer after tobacco ;
WHEREAS the nuclear wastes from reactors and from uranium mines remain radioactive for millions of years, contaminate the environment and pose elevated health risks for the population ;
WHEREAS the export of uranium may contravene the international Non-Proliferation Treaty and, if the case arises, may contribute to war crimes and crimes against humanity ;
WHEREAS the costs and the risks of nuclear energy make it undesirable in comparison with other types of energy: hydroelectric, wind power, geomthermal, and solar energy ;
THEREFORE the undersigned urge the government:
• To abandon the purchase of the Pointe Lepreau reactor ;
• To close and dismantle the Gentilly-2 nuclear reactor ;
• To declare a moratorium on all exploration and mining of uranium in Quebec ; and
• To develop an expertise in nuclear demolition which would make Quebec a world leader in this emerging field of technology.
=============================
2. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network or Online
Online: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/
The_Nature_of_Things/ID=1410952626
Imagine that one morning you wake up to find out your next-door neighbour may be a nuclear power plant.
There was a time when we thought atomic power would solve all our energy needs. That promise lost its lustre in cost overruns, accidents and cover-ups. Now after decades of fading into the background the nuclear power industry is poised for a comeback. In Canada, and around the world, the nuclear industry is rebranding itself as the only practical solution to global warming.
This is a story of global importance – it’s also a very local story. It’s a tale of two small towns: one in rural Ontario that has been a centre of nuclear power almost as long as there has been nuclear power. The other is in the legendary Peace country of Northern Alberta, where residents woke up one day to hear that Alberta’s first nuclear power facility might be moving in next door.
We travel with Lorraine Jensen and Brenda McSween from their farms in Peace River, Alberta to Kincardine, Ontario searching for answers to questions that are dividing their once harmonious community.
My Nuclear Neighbour is written and produced by Donna and Daniel Zuckerbrot for Reel Time Images.
The episode focuses on Bruce Power's efforts to build new reactors in the Peace River region of Alberta, Canada. Bruce Power owns and operates the largest nuclear power plant in North America, and the second biggest in the world, on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, just 50 miles from Michigan. The program will feature Montreal-based Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, who, along with Michael Keegan of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes of Monroe, Michigan co-chairs the Great Lakes United Nuclear-Free/Green Energy Task Force, upon which Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps has served for a decade.
=========================
3. Cameco’s Progress at Cigar Lake
a) Cameco Re-enters Underground Development at Cigar Lake
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cameco ... _news_stmp
press release Feb. 11, 2010, 10:23 a.m. EST ·
SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN, Feb 11, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- ALL AMOUNTS ARE STATED IN CDN $ (UNLESS NOTED)
Cameco Corporation /quotes/comstock/11t!cco (CA:CCO 29.07, -0.36, -1.22%) /quotes/comstock/13*!ccj/quotes/nls/ccj (CCJ 27.71, +0.15, +0.54%) announced today that crews safely re-entered the main working level of the Cigar Lake mine, 480 metres below surface, on February 10, 2010.
Prior to re-entry, the mine was fully dewatered and the main shaft refurbished including installation of the ladderway, replacement of electrical and mechanical components, and extension of the in-shaft pumping system. The workings at the 420 metre level, where the last inflow occurred, have been inspected and secured.
Safe access to the 480 metre level has been established and work to inspect, assess and secure the underground development has begun. This work will be followed by restoration of underground mine systems and infrastructure in preparation for resumed construction activities.
"Resuming work underground is a key milestone for the Cigar Lake project," said Cameco's president and CEO Jerry Grandey. "We have incorporated the knowledge gained in the Athabasca Basin to systematically and diligently manage this project as we move toward our goal of safe, reliable production."
MORE:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cameco ... _news_stmp
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
b) Progress made at Cigar Lake
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Progress+made+Cigar+Lake/2553569/story.html
Crews reach level 480 metres below surface
By Cassandra Kyle, The StarPhoenix February 12, 2010
The underground workings of Cameco Corp.'s troubled Cigar Lake uranium mine are expected to be secured prior to October, the company said Thursday as it announced workers had reached 480 metres below surface level of the mine earlier in the week.
However, the Saskatoon-based company cautioned that securing the underground workings of the world's largest undeveloped high-grade uranium deposit will depend on the condition of the mine. For now, crews can set foot on the 480-metre level of the de-watered site and the company should be able to get a better idea of the state of the underground environment.
"Resuming work underground is a key milestone for the Cigar Lake project," said Jerry Grandey, Cameco's president and CEO. "We have incorporated the knowledge gained in the Athabasca Basin to systematically and diligently manage this project as we move toward our goal of safe, reliable production."
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Progress+made+Cigar+Lake/2553569/story.html
===========================
4. (Cameco) CEO a deep thinker Plus Letter: Hughes: Cameco’s CEO is thinking?!
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/deep+thinker/
2520409/story.html
BY CASSANDRA KYLE, THE STARPHOENIX FEBRUARY 4, 2010
ameco Corp. CEO Jerry Grandey has made doubling uranium production a goal of the company
As president and CEO of Cameco Corp., Jerry Grandey is no stranger to spending time in airports.
The Saskatoon-based business leader often jets away to engagements relatively close to home in North America, or as far away as India, where the company recently opened an office.
Last Friday, Grandey spent a few minutes inside the Prince Albert airport. That's where StarPhoenix business reporter Cassandra Kyle asked Cameco's CEO five questions about the company's future.
SP: When would you like to see production begin at Cigar Lake?
JG: Well, I think the answer to that is as soon as possible. We're now down the shaft well over 400 metres and we're getting a glimpse of some of the underground workings. We haven't put our feet down there yet, but from the cage we're able to kind of look around.
But only when we're finally able to walk through the underground workings and see what the condition is from being underwater, now a little over three years, are we going to be able to answer that question.
We're making great progress. There's a lot of innovation, a lot of creativity that goes on up there every day to try and move it forward as fast as we can.
SP: Cameco raised hundreds of millions of dollars (on the market) in 2009. Will the company be announcing any acquisitions soon?
JG: The principle focus is on doubling production from where it is today at about 21 million pounds up to 40, and we really intend to do that with properties and assets that we already control, not just in Canada but in Australia as well as in Kazakhstan, and we believe that from our own cash flow and resources that development, that doubling of production, can get funded.
Having said that, we're always looking for opportunities where we believe that if we did an acquisition, we could add value to Cameco within the nuclear sphere. We've been quite active with vertical integration over the last few years in conversion and enrichment but, at the same time, as we demonstrated with the Australian acquisition of the Kintyre mine, when we identify an opportunity that we think can add value, we're prepared to compete and acquire it.
MORE: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/deep+thinker/
2520409/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Letter: Hughes: Cameco’s CEO is ‘thinking’?!
Sent for publishing February 13, 2010
Dear Editor at Star Phoenix:
Cameco’s CEO is ‘thinking’?!
Re: Progress made at Cigar Lake, SP, Feb. 12, 2010
Unfortunately, we will probably never know what happened to the billions of gallons of radioactive water pumped out of this mine. Did it end up in the nearest lake?
Believe it: federal regulations now give some mining projects the green light to do that these days . . the old out-of-sight-out-of-mind disposal system!
One would hope that Cameco's deep-thinking CEO would actually do a little thinking beyond his next bonus!
Such as, THINK: how will the contaminated ground water in and around this hole in the ground affect the future health of humans and wildlife?
How about THINK: what about my grandchildren and their grandchildren???
Or, THINK: of Cameco's enduring gift to the world in the form of DU-contaminated soldiers and civilians (and deformed babies born to them) - wherever SK uranium is used in past and future invasions of other countries!
Will Cameco leave the uranium in the ground? Not a chance!
Disgustingly, Cameco will continue the same outdated, thoughtless, visionless mentality as they move towards their ‘goal of safe, reliable production’ of this lethal substance.
How future generations, knowing that Cameco knew of the dangers, will thank them!
Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK
=========================
5. Local Nuclear War --Global Suffering - Scientific American
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/
RobockToonSciAmJan2010.pdf
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 3:49 PM
Friends,
Scientific American recently published, in its January, 2010 edition, an important article on the environmental consequences of nuclear war; it is entitled, "Local Nuclear War: Global Suffering".
It focuses upon a war fought between India and Pakistan in which 100 nuclear weapons are detonated in their mega cities, and makes it clear that deadly climate change and massive ozone destruction following such a war could kill up to 1 billion people from nuclear famine.
It also discusses the consequences of a larger war fought with strategic nuclear weapons, which would likely end human history.
For the complete PDF file, please go to
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/R ... an2010.pdf
I highly recommend this story.
This information should be used to create a sense of urgency in the general discussion of nuclear abolition. Steven Starr
======================
6. No Nukes – an essay by Ralph Nader
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/13
by Ralph Nader, Saturday, February 13, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
A generation of Americans has grown up without a single nuclear power plant being brought on line since before the near meltdown of the Three Mile Island structure in 1979. They have not been exposed to the enormous costs, risks and national security dangers associated with their operations and the large amount of radioactive wastes still without a safe, permanent storage place for tens of thousands of years.
All Americans better get informed soon, for a resurgent atomic power lobby wants the taxpayers to pick up the tab for relaunching this industry. Unless you get Congress to stop this insanely dirty and complex way to boil water to generate steam for electricity, you'll be paying for the industry's research, the industry's loan guarantees and the estimated
trillion dollars (inflation-adjusted) cost of just one meltdown, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, plus vast immediate and long-range casualties.
The Russian roulette-playing nuclear industry claims a class nine meltdown will never happen. That none of the thousands of rail cars, trucks and barges with radioactive wastes will ever have a catastrophic accident. That terrorists will forgo striking a nuclear plant or hijacking deadly materials, and go for far less consequential disasters.
The worst nuclear reactor accident occurred in 1986 at Chernobyl in what is now Ukraine. Although of a different design than most U.S. reactors, the resultant breach of containment released a radioactive cloud that spread around the globe but concentrated most intensively in Belarus, Ukraine and European Russia and secondarily over 40% of Europe.
For different reasons, both governmental and commercial interests were intent on downplaying both the immediate radioactively-caused deaths and diseases and the longer term devastations from this silent, invisible form of violence. They also were not eager to fund follow up monitoring and research.
Now comes the English translation of the most comprehensive, scientific report to date titled Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment whose senior author is biologist Alexey V. Yablokov, a member of the prestigious Russian Academy of Sciences.
Purchasable from the New York Academy of Sciences (visit nyas.org/annals), this densely referenced analysis covers the acute radiation inflicted on both the first-responders (called "liquidators") and on residents nearby, who suffer chronic
radioactive sicknesses. "Today," asserts the report, "more than 6 million people live on land with dangerous levels of contamination--land that will continue to be contaminated for decades to centuries."
Back to the U.S., where, deplorably, President Obama has called for more so-called "safe, clean nuclear power plants." He just sent a budget request for another $54 billion in taxpayer loan guarantees on top of a previous $18 billion passed under Bush. You see, Wall Street financiers will not loan electric companies money to build new nuclear plants which cost $12 billion and up, unless Uncle Sam guarantees one hundred percent of the loan.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/13
=======================
7. Europe's Five "Undeclared Nuclear Weapons States"
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17550
Are Turkey, Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands and Italy Nuclear Powers?
By Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, February 12, 2010
According to a recent report, former NATO Secretary-General George Robertson confirmed that Turkey possesses 40-90 "Made in America" nuclear weapons at the Incirlik military base.(en.trend.az/)
Does this mean that Turkey is a nuclear power?
"Far from making Europe safer, and far from producing a less nuclear dependent Europe, [the policy] may well end up bringing more nuclear weapons into the European continent, and frustrating some of the attempts that are being made to get multilateral nuclear disarmament," (Former NATO Secretary-General George Robertson quoted in Global Security, February 10, 2010)
"'Is Italy capable of delivering a thermonuclear strike?...
Could the Belgians and the Dutch drop hydrogen bombs on enemy targets?...
Germany's air force couldn't possibly be training to deliver bombs 13 times more powerful than the one that destroyed Hiroshima, could it?...
Nuclear bombs are stored on air-force bases in Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands and planes from each of those countries are capable of delivering them." ("What to Do About Europe's Secret Nukes." Time Magazine, December 2, 2009)
The "Official" Nuclear Weapons States
Five countries, the US, UK, France, China and Russia are considered to be "nuclear weapons states" (NWS), "an internationally recognized status conferred by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)". Three other "Non NPT countries" (i.e. non-signatory states of the NPT) including India, Pakistan and North Korea, have recognized possessing nuclear weapons.
MORE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17550
(SEE DETAILS & MAP:
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/euro/euro_pt1.pdf )
=========================
8. Obama DOE to grant first new atomic reactor federal loan guarantee to Plant Vogtle in Georgia
http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2010/2/12/
obama-doe-to-grant-first-new-atomic-reactor-federal-loan-gua.html
February 12, 2010 admin
Dow Jones Newswires has reported, according to sources close to the matter, that the Obama administration's U.S. Department of Energy has decided to grant the first federal taxpayer backed nuclear loan guarantee to the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia. Beyond Nuclear immediately issued a media release, denouncing this transfer of financial risk onto U.S. taxpayers, as well as this creation of radiological risk through DOE financing a reactor design which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission just last October cited as having a major safety flaw. Call President Obama at the White House comment line (202-456-1111) to register your disapproval, then call your two U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative (via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard, 202-224-3121) to urge them to block President Obama's recent request to triple the nuclear loan guarantee program fund from $18.5 billion to $54.5 billion for financing new reactor construction which otherwise private investors would refuse to touch. Avenging Angels' graphic to the left (used with permission) graced the May 12, 2008 cover of The Nation Magazine, which featured Christian Parenti's excellent article "What Nuclear Renaissance?" As the "Burning Money" graphic indicates, any nuclear power relapse in the U.S. can only be carried out at taxpayers' financial, as well as radiological, risk.
Article originally appeared on Beyond Nuclear
(http://www.beyondnuclear.org/).
===============================
9. A Quarter of U.S. Nuclear Plants Are Leaking a Radioactive Material Linked to Cancer
By Harvey Wasserma
n, AlterNet
Posted on February 12, 2010, Printed on February 13, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/story/145663/
Like a decayed flotilla of rickety steamers, at least 27 of America's 104 aging atomic reactors are known to be leaking radioactive tritium, which is linked to cancer if inhaled or ingested through the throat or skin.
The fallout has been fiercest at Vermont Yankee, where a flood of cover-ups has infuriated and terrified near neighbors who say the reactor was never meant to operate more than 30 years, and must now shut.
In 2007 one of Yankee's 22 cooling towers simply collapsed due to rot.
Now the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has confirmed tritium levels in a monitoring well at Vernon to be 3.5 times the federal safety standard. The leaks apparently came from underground pipes whose very existence was recently denied by VY officials in under-oath testimony at a public hearing. Vermont's pro-nuclear Republican Governor Jim Douglas has termed the event "a breach of trust that cannot be tolerated."
Yankee is owned by Entergy, a Mississippi-based consortium that also owns New York's Indian Point reactor, which suffered an internal gusher of radioactive water in May, 2009. Another leak has just been found at Oconee in South Carolina. Illinois' Braidwood leaked so many millions of gallons of tritium-laced water that its owner, Exelon, was forced to buy a new municipal water system for a nearby town.
Entergy says none of Yankee's tritium has been found in local drinking water or in the Connecticut River, which supplies the plant's cooling water. Vernon sits near Vermont's southeast border with Massachusetts, across the river from New Hampshire. "The existence of tritium in such low levels does not present a risk to public health or safety whatsoever," says the company's Robert Williams.
But VY is just the latest of more than two dozen U.S. nuclear plants---many built in the 1960s and '70s---to be found with leaking tritium.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145663/
~ ~ ~ ~
US Tritium leaks
http://www.nuclearwasteadvisory.co.uk/p ... &preview=0
US Tritium leaks...Radioactive tritium, a carcinogen discovered in potentially dangerous levels in groundwater at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, now taints at least 27 of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors raising concerns about how it is escaping from the aging nuclear plants. The leaks many from deteriorating underground pipes come as the nuclear industry is seeking and obtaining federal license renewals, casting itself as a clean-green alternative to power plants that burn fossil fuels.
CBS 1st Feb 2010
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/01/national/
main6163433.shtml
======================
12. Yankee terrorists...Letter: Hoffman - Feb. 14.10
http://www.acehoffman.blogspot.com/
Dear Readers,
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant is leaking copious quantities of tritium, a relatively rare (in nature) and extremely hazardous radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Tritium can be absorbed through the skin, as well as ingested or inhaled.
Water from test wells around the Vermont Yankee reactor has over 2 million picoCuries of tritium per liter -- more than 100 times the legal limit set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for tritium in drinking water, which is 20,000 picoCuries of tritium per liter (20,000 picoCuries equals about 740 radioactive decays per second (740 Becquerel ("Bq")).
Two million picoCuries per liter is nearly as poisonous as the 2.7 million picoCuries per liter that occurs in the chemical brew of a nuclear reactor's primary coolant loop.
Nuclear reactor operators are allowed to release a small fraction of a teaspoon of tritium offsite per year. But even that tiny amount must be diluted in billions of gallons of water to meet the legal standards for drinking water. If the water in your body was polluted with tritium at the legal limit, it would contain about 400 times the average concentration of tritium in the human body.
MORE: http://www.acehoffman.blogspot.com/
===========================
11. Despite billions spent on cleanup, Hanford won't be clean for thousands of years
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/
despite_billions_spent_on_clea.html
By Scott Learn, The Oregonian, February 09, 2010
Some radioactive contaminants at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will threaten the Columbia River for thousands of years, a new analysis projects, despite the multibillion-dollar cleanup efforts by the federal government.
The U.S. Department of Energy projections come from a new analysis of how best to clean up leaking storage tanks and manage waste at Hanford, a former nuclear weapons production site on 586 square miles next to the Columbia in southeastern Washington.
Public hearing
An open house and public hearing on the U.S. Department of Energy's draft environmental impact statement for cleaning up storage tanks and managing waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will start at 6 p.m. Wednesday at the Portland Double Tree Hotel at Lloyd Center, 1000 N.E. Multnomah St.
Oregon officials say the results, including contamination projections for the next 10,000 years, indicate the federal government needs to clean up more of the waste that has already leaked and spilled at Hanford instead of capping and leaving it, a less-expensive alternative.
"We think it should force a re-look at the long-term cleanup plan at Hanford," said Ken Niles, assistant director of the Oregon Department of Energy. "We don't want that level of contamination reaching the Columbia River."
The analysis also shows that the U.S. energy department's plan to import low-level and midlevel radioactive waste from other sites to Hanford after 2022 poses "completely unacceptable" risks, Niles said. Washington is also raising concerns about importing more waste.
The government holds a public hearing Wednesday in Portland on the draft environmental impact statement for tank closure and waste management. Public comments are open through March 19.
Health risks from Hanford's contamination are long-term, not immediate. They're expressed in terms of cancer cases after a lifetime of drinking well water from the site, with a one in 10,000 risk considered high. But many of the contaminant levels at the site exceed health benchmarks by wide margins.
Exposure to lower-volume contaminants with long radioactive half lives, including isotopes of plutonium, iodine and technetium, is projected to get worse over time in some parts of the site as contamination -- most from the 1950s and 1960s -- migrates in groundwater, the analysis indicates.
In the report, the energy department says its preference is to remove and process 99 percent of the contamination in the tanks, excavate about 15 feet underneath them, then cap the site -- an approach that would leave much of the leaked contamination still in the environment. It also favors covering contaminated ditches at the tank farms instead of excavating them.
MORE: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/
despite_billions_spent_on_clea.html
======================
12. Experts challenge ability to deal with new nuclear wastes
http://www.nuclearwasteadvisory.co.uk/page.asp?Id=533
Uranium Intelligence Weekly, 19 January 2010
UNITED KINGDOM
The government's draft nuclear National Policy Statement (NPS) received its most sustained attack this week, as a group of nuclear experts challenged the NPS finding that 'effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations" (UIW Nov.16, p6).
Not true, said the Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates in a lengthy submission to the House of Commons.
The research may simply not be able to provide a solution, the group argued, and 'the Government's confidence that effective arrangements to dispose of waste from new reactors will exist is premature."
MORE: http://www.nuclearwasteadvisory.co.uk/page.asp?Id=533
====================
13. Canada’s Climate Policy: Made by …
http://salmonarm.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/
canadas-climate-policy-made-by/
February 12, 2010
… the U.S., Alberta or all of Canada?
Marlo Raynolds, the Executive Director of the Pembina Institute, provides a commentary on conflicting Canadian provincial and petroleum interests in Congress vs. Parliament: Who will decide Canada’s climate policy? (Feb. 8th 2010).
“ …leaked memos suggest the government’s plan includes giving special treatment to the oilsands, effectively giving the biggest polluters a special licence to pollute and then making other Canadians pay more to meet our national emission reduction target.”
The article references the Pembina Institute’s report Climate Leadership, Economic Prosperity which has been described as:
… the first Canadian study of its kind to show regional impacts on employment and gross domestic product, and the first to comprehensively examine how Canada can meet a greenhouse gas reduction target for 2020 that goes beyond the federal government’s target.
In Raynold’s own words,
“An equitable and balanced approach to addressing climate change, as advocated by the Pembina Institute, has been summarily rejected by Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, the Harper government and the lobbyists at the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers — but we’ve yet to see a credible alternative.”
The article is a good segway to a thought-provoking report that is neither radical nor doom and gloom. Canada can have growth and an effective climate policy but not if we listen mainly to the oil industry or wait for the brokering involved with US politics.
Go Canada Go!
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 16.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:26 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 16.10
Compilation:
1. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network & Letter from Em at Sauble Beach, ON on Bruce Power
2. Nuclear incident exposes 217 workers at Bruce Power
3. Don't wait for new technology to fix climate
4. New North Battleford plant to provide power to grid
5. Beyond Nuclear Denounces President Obama’s Decision to Transfer Financial and Safety Risks of New Reactors to US Taxpayers
6. GE's Nuclear Waste Plan & Background
7. US Media Omission: Iran Calls for Global Nuclear Disarmament & Other Related Articles
8. Jordanians sue Israel over Dimona nuclear plant
9. Premiers and governors to meet in Washington, February 20
10. How an L.A. Suburb Became One of the Most Toxic Towns
11. "The U.S. is a corporatocracy": Interview with Carolyn Baker by Von Lars Schall
12. The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy
13. Join the Climate Trial
14. Naomi Klein's Newsletter - February 2010
15. Fair Vote Canada National Council election is coming! Ottawa – May 15, 2010
========================
1. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network & Letter from Em at Sauble Beach, ON on Bruce Power
Also Online: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/
The_Nature_of_Things/ID=1410952626
Imagine that one morning you wake up to find out your next-door neighbour may be a nuclear power plant.
There was a time when we thought atomic power would solve all our energy needs. That promise lost its lustre in cost overruns, accidents and cover-ups. Now after decades of fading into the background the nuclear power industry is poised for a comeback. In Canada, and around the world, the nuclear industry is rebranding itself as the only practical solution to global warming.
This is a story of global importance – it’s also a very local story. It’s a tale of two small towns: one in rural Ontario that has been a centre of nuclear power almost as long as there has been nuclear power. The other is in the legendary Peace country of Northern Alberta, where residents woke up one day to hear that Alberta’s first nuclear power facility might be moving in next door.
We travel with Lorraine Jensen and Brenda McSween from their farms in Peace River, Alberta to Kincardine, Ontario searching for answers to questions that are dividing their once harmonious community.
My Nuclear Neighbour is written and produced by Donna and Daniel Zuckerbrot for Reel Time Images.
The episode focuses on Bruce Power's efforts to build new reactors in the Peace River region of Alberta, Canada. Bruce Power owns and operates the largest nuclear power plant in North America, and the second biggest in the world, on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, just 50 miles from Michigan. The program will feature Montreal-based Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, who, along with Michael Keegan of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes of Monroe, Michigan co-chairs the Great Lakes United Nuclear-Free/Green Energy Task Force, upon which Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps has served for a decade.
= = = =
Nuclear Power Plant in the Peace River Area - From Emily in Sauble Beach, Ontario – February 15, 2010
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=20
Before I get to the “long type” here, I will let you know that as soon as I heard of Peace River – and that Bruce Power was interested in constructing a Nuclear Plant there - I have had, for some strange reason, not been able to let this go. For weeks now, I have felt in the very pit of my Being a need to Write, and then to connect with someone, and to share the little bit that I can share of my own experiences (as well as those of my Family), in living in an area that is very largely affected by Bruce Power. So, this a different side to the Nuclear Power Plant issue.
When we found out that David Suzuki/ The Nature of Things was airing an overview of the issues facing all of you in Peace River, I made a point of ensuring that I watched the broadcast on February 11. My intuition was shouting to me that there would be something there – something important – that I just HAD to see…And as always, I was not being led astray…As soon as I saw Lorraine Jensen’s face, I could feel this dear woman’s angst, angst that lasted throughout the entire hour-long program. It was Lorraine – perhaps more than anyone else who spoke during the program – that has catapulted me headlong into jotting notes, re-watching the show (we taped it), jotting more notes, and now – transcribing it all and getting this out to you as soon as I possibly could! So here goes!
Part One – The Affect on Local Economy(s)
Key phrase – as goes Bruce Power, so goes our financial economics
Had Lorraine and Brenda journeyed just a little bit further north of Kincardine, they would have happened upon the town of Port Elgin first, and then a little further north on the highway, Southampton as well. Both of these towns were originally ‘agricultural’ towns for the most part – which provided a variety of retail and professional services, grocery stores, churches, small movie houses, schools (primary and secondary) etc., and in Southampton a small hospital as well. The full-time residents were (and still are) families of course, but also retirees – some being farmers who have passed the family farm on to the next generation, and also summer tourists/cottagers who had fled the larger cities to enjoy a slower pace of life, clean air, and an enchanting mix of the beautiful shorelines of Lake Huron, coupled the plethora of wildlife and wild spaces that thrive here.
MORE: http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=20
======================
2. Nuclear incident exposes 217 workers at Bruce Power
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission finds dangerous radiation exposure came during reactor refurbishment in late November
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
See also: Obama announces $8-billion for nuclear plant
Energy: 'Nuclear renaissance' sparks clamour for uranium
Martin Mittelstaedt Published on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 1:11PM EST Last updated on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 2:50PM EST
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission says that as many as 217 workers may have been exposed to radioactivity at the Bruce nuclear power station on the shores of Lake Huron while refurbishing a reactor in late November.
It is believed to be one of the largest mass exposures to radiation at a Canadian nuclear site. The company operating the station, Bruce Power, says that according to its estimates none of the workers received doses exceeding regulatory limits, although there are concerns that the amounts may have come close to the maximum safe exposures.
The CNSC, Canada's nuclear safety watchdog, issued the estimate of the number of people that might have been affected in a regulatory filing today in Ottawa. The incident will be among those discussed by the regulator at a meeting of its board on Thursday.
In its filing, the CNSC said the workers were exposed to alpha contamination, a dangerous forms of radiation that if breathed in or ingested is a cancer risk. The dose calculations, done last month, “were conservatively interpreted as a potential indication that an action level for inhalation of airborne radioactivity may have been exceeded,” the CNSC said.
All of the radioactivity was contained in the station and there was no danger to the public or releases to the general environment around the plant.
Bruce Power is Canada's only private nuclear station operator. It leases two generating plants from the Ontario government, known as Bruce A and Bruce B.
The company is currently refurbishing the Bruce A station, a multi-year, $5.25-billion project that is one of the largest construction undertakings in Canada outside of the oil sands.
The overhaul of the station includes repairs to two reactors that are already about two years behind schedule.
The CNSC filing said it was issuing details of the worker exposure because it was “an occurrence or incident that receives, or may receive, substantial media coverage or that has a high public visibility.”
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
=============================
3. Don't wait for new technology to fix climate
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
wait+technology+climate/2539456/story.html
By Paul Hanley, The Star Phoenix February 9, 2010
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is promoting new technology as the way to fix climate problems. Neither wishful thinking nor legislation, he observed during his recent trip to the Davos forum, can alter the fact that fighting climate change is a costly, long-term objective dependent on technological solutions yet to be developed.
There's some truth to that, but it's not the whole truth. Legislation and regulation that support the use of current technology can provide cost-effective solutions right now.
A case in point: Ford is introducing a new Focus model in Europe that gets 74 MPG (combined city and highway) and emits just 99 grams of CO2 per kilometre. This is not an expensive hybrid vehicle, by the way. It is a traditional gas-powered car with some tweaks. Meanwhile, North American Focus models achieve less than 40 MPG combined city and highway driving.
The question is, why doesn't Ford make cars like that for us?
Apparently, it's partly to do with differences in regulations making it hard to build those engines to meet North American specs, but a large part of it involves different attitudes to climate change in Europe and North America.
Europeans take climate change more seriously, so European rules and regulations require European automakers to adhere to strict low-emissions standards, which is related to good gas mileage. After Europe passed legislation limiting carbon emissions, automakers swiftly revamped their cars to meet the standards. The same thing would happen here if our politicians showed some leadership. The industry would make a fuss and then comply.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
wait+technology+climate/2539456/story.html
=========================
4. New North Battleford plant to provide power to grid
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
North+Battleford+plant+provide+power+grid/2539396/story.html
SNN, Bloomberg News; Regina Leader-Post February 9, 2010
Northland Power Inc., an independent power producer based in Toronto, has been chosen to provide 261 megawatts (MW) of power to the provincial electrical grid by 2013, SaskPower announced Monday.
The $700-million facility will be located in the North Battleford area, with construction expected to begin in July. Northland, which operates two wind farms in Canada, agreed to build and run the natural gas-fired plant.
"Our top priority at SaskPower is to ensure that the province's residents and businesses have a reliable and sustainable supply of electricity for years to come," said Gary Wilkinson, vice-president of planning, environment and regulatory affairs for SaskPower. "This project will help us meet that need."
SaskPower and Northland Power have entered into a 20-year power purchase agreement for the facility, which will provide baseload generation for the province. Generation facilities that provide baseload power provide energy at a constant rate.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
North+Battleford+plant+provide+power+grid/2539396/story.html
============================
5. Beyond Nuclear Denounces President Obama’s Decision to Transfer Financial and Safety Risks of New Reactors to US Taxpayers
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/16-1
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 16, 2010 11:46 AM
CONTACT: Beyond Nuclear [1] Kevin Kamps, 240.462.3216
TAKOMA PARK, MD - February 16 - Beyond Nuclear today denounced President Obama’s granting of a conditional loan guarantee to Southern Nuclear Operating Company for the construction of new atomic reactors at its Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant site in Waynesboro, Georgia. Two new Westinghouse-Toshiba Advanced Passive (AP) 1000 reactors are proposed at Plant Vogtle. President Obama’s award comes despite an announcement by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in October of a major safety flaw with the AP1000 design.
An NRC media release dated October 15, 2009 [2] documents that the AP1000 shield building, as currently designed, is vulnerable to severe weather such as tornadoes and hurricanes, and natural disasters like earthquakes. This raises the concern that the design is also vulnerable to terrorist attacks such as intentionally crashing airliners. Thus, the shield building’s intended protection of the reactor’s primary radioactivity containment is questionable, as is its ability to provide radiation shielding during normal operations as well as to support a large emergency cooling water supply tank.
“It is utterly irresponsible of President Obama to risk public safety and the environment by financing the incomplete and flawed AP1000 design at Vogtle and, worse still, at taxpayers’ financial risk,” said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear. “Even if ultimately fixed, the AP1000’s major design flaw risks delays in construction and cost overruns, the same problems that delivered death blows to scores of atomic reactors three decades ago.”
The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that over half of new reactor owners will default on their loan repayments. The federal nuclear loan guarantees would finance up to 80% of the total project cost for a new reactor. Cost estimates for certain proposed new reactors in the U.S. have already surpassed $10 billion. The two new reactors at Vogtle are currently estimated by proponents to cost $14.5 billion, a figure expected by critics to significantly increase.
“Making federal atomic reactor loan guarantees conditional upon a Nuclear Regulatory Commission license won't protect U.S. taxpayers,” Kamps said. “The nuclear industry has a long history of defaulting on loans in the post-licensing period due to design flaws, construction mistakes, cost overruns, lengthy delays, and other problems that President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu cannot foresee, stumbling blocks which are not eliminated by NRC granting a construction and operating license,” Kamps added.
In the past, 21 atomic reactors were cancelled during construction, 22 were cancelled after receiving a license but before construction began, and 1 was even cancelled after construction had been completed.
President Obama’s award of billions of dollars in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees to Southern Nuclear is intended to resurrect the nuclear power industry, after a 36 year hiatus in the building of new atomic reactors in the U.S. This loan guarantee is the first to be disbursed from an $18.5 billion atomic reactor loan guarantee fund appropriated by Congress, and approved by President George W. Bush, at Christmas, 2007. The nuclear loan guarantee program was first authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
BACKGROUND
Due to Toshiba-Westinghouse’s proposed seventeenth revision, the AP1000 design cannot receive final NRC approval until a year from now, at the earliest. In addition, the Vogtle Units 3 and 4 combined Construction and Operating License Application (COLA) itself cannot receive NRC approval until mid-2011, at the earliest.
The two reactors currently operating at Vogtle were originally predicted to cost only $660 million to construct, but the price tag ultimately skyrocketed to $8.87 billion, a 13-fold or more than 1,000% cost overrun.
Earlier this year, DOE’s short list for nuclear loan guarantees was revealed by media reports to also include: Constellation Energy and Electricite de France, which propose a French Areva “Evolutionary Power Reactor” (EPR) at Calvert Cliffs, Maryland; NRG Energy and CPS Energy, which propose a Toshiba-Westinghouse “Advanced Boiling Water Reactor” (ABWR) at the South Texas Project nuclear plant near Bay City, Texas; and SCANA Corp. and South Carolina Electric and Gas, which propose an AP1000 at the Summer nuclear power plant in South Carolina.
Nuclear safety regulators in France, Finland, and the U.K. have recently questioned the safety of the EPR design. A nearly 75% cost overrun, and three year construction schedule delay, have resulted from 3,000 documented design and construction flaws at an EPR being built at Olkiluoto, Finland.
NRG and CPS are now battling in court over a $4-5 billion cost escalation in the price tag for the two ABWRs proposed at South Texas Project.
Thus, each of the new reactors under consideration by DOE for the initial nuclear loan guarantee awards is plagued by safety flaws, incomplete designs, skyrocketing costs, and/or construction delays. More information about this can be found at: http://www.psr.org/nuclear-bailout/ [3].
###
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
Beyond Nuclear Links: Homepage [1]Beyond Nuclear (Press Center) [4]
===========================
6. GE's Nuclear Waste Plan
http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/14/
general-electric-reactors-technology-ecotech-nuclear.html?boxes=Home
Jonathan Fahey, 02.16.10, 06:00 AM EST
The company wants to use radioactive waste as fuel in a next-generation reactor.
Eric Loewen won't even utter the words "spent nuclear fuel." That's the industry term of art for the nuclear fuel bundles that are pulled out of today's reactors after they're done making electricity.
Loewen, a nuclear engineer at General Electric ( GE - news - people ), doesn't see them as "spent" at all. He sees them as raw material for a new type of nuclear reactor. "It's used, but it's an energy asset," he says.
GE's joint venture with Hitachi, called GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, would like to build both the reactor and facility that creates the new fuel at a single site, which GE calls an advanced recycling center, or an ARC.
Loewen and GE suddenly have a captive audience. The Obama administration plans to offer $54 billion in loan guarantees to help the country start building new nuclear reactors again. (See "New Boost for Nukes") But the country's old plan of storing it deep underneath Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which taxpayers spent $9 billion thinking about, is dead. (Harry Reid, remember, is from Nevada.)
So, at the same time the administration announced expansion of the loan guarantee program, it revealed that it was commissioning a blue ribbon panel to study and make recommendations on how the country can deal with its nuclear waste.
Storing long-lived nuclear waste underground hasn't worked out so well. Whatever the politics at play, getting humans who live for 80 years to sign off on something that is supposed to be guaranteed to stay safe for 1 million isn't so easy.
MORE:
http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/14/
general-electric-reactors-technology-ecotech-nuclear.html?boxes=Home
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Behind the Scenes, GE’s Top Exec Confided Credit Woes
http://www.alternet.org/story/145581/
behind_the_scenes%2C_ge%E2%80%99s_top_exec_confided_credit_woes
Hank Paulson's new book details a very different recollection of events that persuaded FDIC Chair Sheila Bair to help guarantee over $70 billion in GE debt.
February 8, 2010 ProPublica / By Jeff Gerth
As the financial crisis worsened toward the end of 2008, CEO Jeffrey Immelt and other leaders at General Electric repeatedly assured the public that there was no need to worry about the company’s ability to access credit markets and refinance its massive debts as they came due.
But in private conversations that alarmed then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Immelt laid out a different picture of GE’s credit situation, according to Paulson’s new book about the crisis.
Instead, Paulson writes, Immelt on at least four occasions expressed worries about GE’s short-term debt, known as commercial paper, and eventually lobbied for access to special government guarantees for such debt.
To take one example: On Sept. 15, 2008, the day Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy, Paulson says he was "startled" when Immelt came to his office and told him GE was finding it "very difficult" to sell short-term debt "for any term longer than overnight." A day earlier, GE sent investors a letter (PDF) saying its ability to sell commercial paper was "robust."
Immelt, in a statement issued Friday by GE, said he "does not believe" the two discussed problems with GE commercial paper on Sept. 15, or in one previous talk. The company did not contest Paulson's account of other conversations about the issue a few weeks later.
If correct, the portrayals in Paulson’s book, "On the Brink: Inside the Race to Stop the Collapse of the Global Financial System," could spell trouble for GE in court, where shareholders are accusing Immelt and other company executives in civil suits of violating securities laws by misleading investors in the fall of 2008 about GE’s finances and withholding key information.
MORE:
http://www.alternet.org/story/145581/
behind_the_scenes%2C_ge%E2%80%99s_top_exec_confided_credit_woes
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
GE and Nuclear Energy
http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/produc ... ar_energy/
en/index.htm
Primary Activities
Today, nuclear energy supplies 16% of the world's electricity, avoiding the emission of about 2.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year that would otherwise be generated by fossil fuel solutions, such as supercritical pulverized coal.
GE has provided advanced and sophisticated technology for nuclear energy for over five decades. Four main product lines support this capability: new reactors, nuclear fuel, reactor services and performance services.
MORE: http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/produc ... ar_energy/
en/index.htm
=========================
7. US Media Omission: Iran Calls for Global Nuclear Disarmament
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/15-4
by Gavin Dahl Published on Monday, February 15, 2010 by Raw Story
The American public has not been informed by the US news media about highly newsworthy statements made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday February 12.
He said the era of nuclear weapons is over, suggesting Iran has no plans to build "inhumane" A-bombs. Ahmadinejad called for a world free of nuclear arms in an interview [1] with Russia's NTV channel.
"We believe that not only the Middle East but also the whole world should be free of nuclear weapons because we see such weapons as inhumane," he said.
"Today, no one can use a nuclear weapon and we believe that the US is taking a wrong move by stockpiling nuclear weapons," he added. "Those who claim that they are against nuclear weapons should dismantle their nuclear weapons first to prove that they are honest."
So far, the libertarian-leaning Antiwar.com has been the only American media outlet to cover his statements [2].
Considering Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's calls for sanctions [3] over Iran's nuclear program, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position [4] that new sanctions should be "crippling," one might think the US media would pay attention to Ahmadinejad's statements.
Instead, the media's Sarah Palin obsession [5] means that more Americans heard repeated calls to start a new war with Iran in the past week.
Iran has continually denied it plans to build nuclear weapons. The country's high-profile stance is that enriched uranium will be used for Tehran's medical reactor [6].
The interview Friday was given to Russian channel NTV, once critical of all-powerful Vladimir Putin, but now controlled by the state-owned Gazprom conglomerate. CNN published a timeline [7] of the changes to the station nine years ago.
© 2010 Raw Story
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Other Iran/Nuclear-related Articles - Feb. 16.10
http://english.aljazeera.net/
- Iran 'still open to nuclear deal'
- Turkey 'will aid Iran uranium swap'
- Israel urges Russia to act on Iran
- Which way Iran?
- Q&A: Uranium enrichment
- Timeline: Iran's nuclear programme
============================
8. Jordanians sue Israel over Dimona nuclear plant
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=214273
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:13:40 GMT
A Jordanian human rights group is set to sue Israel for the damage its nuclear facility in Dimona has caused to the environment and the residents in south Jordan.
The al-Jisr al-Arabi center has accused Israel of causing death, cancer and other afflictions among the Jordanian population residing in the area adjacent to the nuclear plant and thus prone to the toxic gases and radiation the facility emits.
The Amman-based human rights group has reportedly taken the preliminary steps necessary ahead of filing a legal lawsuit against Israel in the coming month with Jordanian legal bodies.
The center met with a number of the reactor's victims and "collected evidence and proof that attest to a rise in the number of cancer cases, especially among residents of the southern region, which is adjacent to the reactor."
"This is an ongoing and deliberate crime on Israel's part, which still causes cases of death and injury in large numbers among the Jordanians," said the center's General Manager Attorney Amjad Shammout.
MORE: http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=214273
==============================
9. Premiers and governors to meet in Washington, February 20
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 7:59 AM
The Canadian Press has reported that, "Canada's premiers will get a moment in the spotlight (on February 20) at the influential National Governors' Association winter meeting, a gathering that often serves as a guiding policy light for both Congress and the White House."
"It's the first-ever meeting between the association and its Canadian counterpart, the Council of the Federation. ...Regional premiers and governors often get together to discuss common issues, but it's unprecedented for all governors and premiers to sit down in a formal setting at such a prestigious event in the U.S. capital."
Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Alberta, and Newfoundland and Labrador will be represented at the meeting.
"Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall is co-hosting an event during the meeting entitled Common Border, Common Ground, focusing on touchy Canada-U.S. issues that include trade, border security and energy."
The Edmonton Sun adds that, "Promoting secure energy exports will be the main focus of a trip to Washington, D.C., for Alberta's international and intergovernmental minister (Iris Evans). Also on the agenda is promoting the importance of open trade with the U.S., officials said Thursday."
A Council of the Federation media release notes, "The mission will focus on trade and border issues, as well as on energy and the environment."
The Globe and Mail reports today that, "Border issues and trade will top the agenda, including the Buy American deal..."
The Canadian Press article is at http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/
20091218/Meeting_US_091218?hub=EdmontonHome.
The Edmonton Sun article is at http://m.edmontonsun.com/news/Alberta/12846141.1.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
===================================
10. How an L.A. Suburb Became One of the Most Toxic Towns
http://www.alternet.org/story/145508/
By Sena Christian, AlterNet Posted on February 10, 2010, Printed on February 16, 2010
In July 2007, Gail Shephard quit her job as an orthopedic technician. Her weakened muscles had made it too difficult for her to wash her hair or even pull up her pants in the morning. Now, Shephard, 55, takes two pain medications and Mirapex, a pill to treat Parkinson's disease, each day.
"I don't do anything," Shephard said. "I sit in the same chair. I dread getting up in the morning, it's so painful. I can't walk and I hold onto the walls to go the bathroom and back. And that is my entire day."
But Shephard doesn't have Parkinson's disease and doctors don't quite know how to diagnose her. She knows, however, that her ailments began shortly after February 2006, when she transferred to the new Kaiser Permanente facility built on the site of a former NASA plant, which comprised 160 acres of land in the Los Angeles suburb of Downey, Calif.
Shephard would come to find that she wasn't alone in her unexplained health problems. Several other former employees of the Kaiser Downey Medical Center and Downey Studios -- a film-production center also located at the site -- claim that they too became ill as a result of exposure to toxic contaminants left over from seven decades of military and aerospace research and manufacturing at the old NASA Downey Industrial Plant. The ailments have become so common that workers there coined a nickname: "Downey flu."
As for Shephard, the move to Downey aggravated her tendon and joint pain. Soon after, her feet and ankles ached: "My foot was so sensitive I couldn't put a blanket on it or let water touch it. I knew something was wrong, but I didn't know what."
That was only the beginning. Shephard had difficulty breathing, and experienced back spasms, dizzy spells and migraine headaches. Before long, she was urinating blood. Now, she has central nervous system damage and most of her body has turned numb.
Those who suffer from "Downey flu" claim that the city of Downey and Industrial Realty Group, which operate what's now called Downey Landing, failed to properly remediate the property or notify workers of mold, fungi and other toxic residue. The U.S. Department of Labor has identified 260 chemicals found at the NASA site, including arsenic, lead, uranium, plutonium, trichloroethylene and chromium.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145508/
==========================
11. "The U.S. is a corporatocracy": Interview with Carolyn Baker by Von Lars Schall
(from MM News (Germany): Feb. 2, 2010) Feb 03, 2010
http://transition-times.com/2010/02/03/
the-u-s-is-a-corporatocracy-interview-with-carolyn-baker/
US-historian and author Carolyn Baker is a critical commentator of social justice and environmental events. In an exclusive interview for MMNews she discusses the connection between 9-11 and Peak Oil, the coming food crisis, Permaculture and the Sustainability Movement in the U.S.
Carolyn Baker holds a PhD in Counseling, has published four books, was
Managing Editor for "From the Wilderness" (www.fromthewilderness.com) and for 11 years an adjunct professor of history and psychology.
Furthermore, she manages Speaking Truth to Power at www.carolynbaker.net, a website offering breaking alternative news and options for navigating unprecedented transitions. She published in February of last year her latest book "Sacred Demise. Walking the Spiritual Path of Industrial Civilization's Collapse", which is available at her website and at Amazon. She lives in Colorado, U.S.A.
MORE:
http://transition-times.com/2010/02/03/
the-u-s-is-a-corporatocracy-interview-with-carolyn-baker/
==============================
12. The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy
http://blackbook.foreignpolicy.ca/
Book by Yves Engler; 2009, Fernwood Publishing, Nova Scotia, 294 pp.
February 01, 2010 By Tamara Lorincz Tamara Lorincz's ZSpace Page
The Canadian government supplied the uranium for the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in World War II. Ottawa supported South African apartheid by allowing trade and commerce with the racist government there. With the support of its foreign service, Canadian mining companies weakened environmental regulations and propped up dictators in Central and South America. In 2004, Canada helped France and the United States overthrow the democratically elected government of Haiti.
Canadians will be shocked and saddened by Yves Engler's The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy, a critical examination of Canada's role in the world. Engler is a Montreal-based independent journalist/activist who has written two other books, Playing Left Wing: From Rink Rat to Student Radical and Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority (co-authored with Anthony Fenton).
It was Canada's role in the coup that ousted Haitian president Jean Bertrand Aristide, a populist priest to the poor, that caused Engler to question more broadly Canadian foreign policy. "Democracy," writes Engler in his new book, "requires citizens to keep themselves informed about what their government is doing. Canadians have a right and a responsibility to know, debate and to ultimately shape what is being done in our name around the world."
Engler describes the history of Canadian foreign policy in the Caribbean, the Middle East, Mexico, Central and South America, Central and South Asia, and Africa. Using declassified documents, government sources, and extensive research, he uncovers the darker motives and machinations behind Canadian decisions on international trade, foreign aid, and military operations.
The format of Engler's book is similar to American author William Blum's 1995 tour-de-force Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II. Like Blum's recounting of U.S. destabilizing interventions over the last 50 years, Engler indicts Canada's corporate elite and, in particular, Canadian banks and mining companies. He documents how companies —such as Barrick Gold, Inco, Falconbridge, Alcan, Placer Dome, Goldcorp, and others, with the financial assistance of the Bank of Nova Scotia, Royal Bank, and the Export Development Corporation—weakened environmental and labor standards, displaced indigenous populations, employed brutal private security guards, and contaminated land and water in the countries they were operating in —such as Honduras, Guatemala, Peru, and Papua New Guinea.
Engler notes that the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) aid follows Canadian corporate and military moves around the world. For instance, he discovered how CIDA funds were channeled through Canadian mining companies for their development projects in Ghana and the Philippines. Often these mining companies would not pay taxes or royalties and the Canadian government would force these poor countries to shoulder onerous economic policies, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund's structural adjustment programs that privatized and deregulated their public services.
He also condemns Canada's military transformation to war fighting and its integration with the U.S. military. He specifically cites the deployment of Canadian warships with the U.S. fleet in the Persian Gulf and the operation of Joint Task Force 2 (JTF2)—a secretive special combat force that has no parliamentary oversight—alongside the U.S. Unknown to Canadians, JTF2 has operated in Indonesia, Iraq, Haiti, Colombia, and Afghanistan (as an undeclared asset).
Engler concludes with his explanation for why Canadian foreign policy is the way it is and how to change it. Canada has a long tradition of supporting imperialism and colonialism, from fighting with the British Empire in the 19th century to integrating militarily with United States today. He argues that the Canadian corporate elite and defense establishment have disproportionately dictated its foreign policy to the exclusion of Parliament and the public. For instance, Canadians were not consulted on the Canada First Defence Strategy released last June that committed the federal government to spend $490 billion on the military over the next 20 years. Further, Engler blames the media for embedding with the military and not adequately investigating policies and actions abroad.
To change course, Engler's specific recommendations are to withdraw from NATO, cut the size and spending of the Canadian Armed Forces, and provide aid to the poorest people in the poorest countries. "Above all else it is key that Canadian aid should do no wrong," he demands.
Engler's recommendations align with Canadians' views. Last year, Environics commissioned a survey that found that the majority of Canadians believed their country should make a positive contribution and respect international bodies that provide mechanisms for dialogue and co-operation. An internal poll prepared for National Defence, and obtained by the Canadian press, found that most Canadians view their soldiers as peacekeepers and would rather see them helping disaster victims than fighting. "While citizens of Canada, we are also neighbours to everyone who shares this planet. We must be good neighbours. That should be the underlying premise of Canada's foreign policy," writes Engler.
To be good neighbors, The Black Book of Foreign Policy compels Canadians to stay informed, to care, and to hold their federal government to account.
Z - Tamara Lorincz is a member of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace.
From: Z Net - The Spirit Of Resistance Lives
URL: http://www.zcommunications.org/
the-black-book-of-canadian-foreign-policy-by-tamara-lorincz
=============================
13. Join the Climate Trial
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/08-9
Published on Monday, February 8, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
by Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, Terry Tempest Williams, and Dr. James Hansen
[The following was co-written by Naomi Klein, author of the #1 international bestseller The Shock Doctrine, Terry Tempest Williams, world renowned wildlife author [1], Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org [2] and author of The End Of Nature [3], and Dr. James Hansen, author of Storms of my Grandchildren [4], and who is regarded as the world's leading climatologist. All recognize the trial of Tim DeChristopher to be a turning point in the climate movement. Included are links to resources [5] for travel to Utah].
Dear Friends,
The epic fight to ward off global warming and transform the energy system that is at the core of our planet's economy takes many forms: huge global days of action, giant international conferences like the one that just failed in Copenhagen, small gestures in the homes of countless people.
But there are a few signal moments, and one comes next month, when the federal government puts Tim DeChristopher on trial in Salt Lake City. Tim--"Bidder 70"--pulled off one of the most creative protests against our runaway energy policy in years: he bid for the oil and gas leases on several parcels of federal land even though he had no money to pay for them, thus upending the auction. The government calls that "violating the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act" and thinks he should spend ten years in jail for the crime; we call it a noble act, a profound gesture made on behalf of all of us and of the future.
Tim's action drew national attention to the fact that the Bush Administration spent its dying days in office handing out a last round of favors to the oil and gas industry. After investigating irregularities in the auction, the Obama Administration took many of the leases off the table, with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar criticizing the process as "a headlong rush." And yet that same Administration is choosing to prosecute the young man who blew the whistle on this corrupt process.
We cannot let this stand. When Tim disrupted the auction, he did so in the fine tradition of non-violent civil disobedience that changed so many unjust laws in this country's past. Tim's upcoming trial is an occasion to raise the alarm once more about the peril our planet faces. The situation is still fluid--the trial date has just been set, and local supporters are making plans for how to mark the three-day proceedings. But they are asking people around the country to flood into Salt Lake City in mid-March. If you come, there will be ample opportunity for both legal protest and civil disobedience.
For example: Outside the courthouse, there will be a mock trial, with experts like NASA's Jim Hansen providing the facts that should be heard inside the chambers. We don't want Tim on trial--we want global warming on the stand.
Demonstrators will be using the time-honored tactics of civil disobedience to make their voices heard outside the courthouse in an effort to prevent "business as usual"--it's business as usual that's wrecking the earth.
There will be evening concerts and gatherings, including a "mini-summit" to share ideas on how the climate movement should proceed in the years ahead. This is a people's movement that draws power from around the globe; for a few days its headquarters will be Salt Lake City.
You can get the most up-to-date news at climatetrial.com [6], including schedules for non-violence training, and information about legal representation. If you're coming, bring not only your passion but also your creativity--we need lots of art and music to help make the point that we won't sit idly by while the government tries to scare the environmental movement into meek cooperation. This kind of trial is nothing but intimidation--and the best answers to intimidation are joy and resolve. That's what we'll need in Utah.
We know it's short notice. Some of us won't be able to make it to Utah because we have other commitments or are limiting travel, and if you're in the same situation, climatetrial.com [6] will also have details of solidarity actions in other parts of the country. If you can contribute money to help make the week's events possible, click here [7]. But more than your money we need your body, your brains, and your heart. In a landscape of little water, where redrock canyons rise upward like praying hands, we can offer our solidarity to the wild: wild lands and wild hearts. Tim DeChristopher deserves and needs our physical and spiritual support in the name of a just and vibrant community.
Thank you for standing with us,
Naomi Klein,
Bill McKibben
Terry Tempest Williams
Dr. James Hansen
=================================
14. Naomi Klein's Newsletter - February 2010
http://www.naomiklein.org/main
In February's Newsletter:
Naomi's Latest Column for The Nation— "Haiti: A Creditor, Not a Debtor"
Video Dispatch from Haiti: The Politics of Reconstruction
Activist Call Out: We Must Stand with Tim DeChristopher
Don’t Miss—Naomi to Speak in Toronto about Climate Debt
Watch Naomi in Conversation with Raj Patel and Amy Goodman
Looking For a Different Take on the Vancouver Olympics?
========================
15. Fair Vote Canada National Council election is coming! Ottawa – May 15, 2010
http://www.fairvote.ca/
Are you a member?
Are you interested in being a candidate?
In April, members in good standing of Fair Vote Canada will be eligible to cast votes and run for office in the election of FVC’s National Council. Members will use the single transferable vote (a proportional voting system) to elect candidates to fill seven seats on the 15-seat National Council.
To vote or run, you must be a member in good standing, meaning your annual membership dues have been paid. We encourage members from all parts of the country, all walks of life and all points on the political spectrum to consider candidacy. Most National Council business is conducted by email, with periodic conference calls and one in-person meeting in conjunction with the AGM.
New members joining by February 23 will be eligible to vote and run for office. The candidate nomination deadline is March 15 (candidates are self-nominated).
Those interested in running or with questions are invited to contact the Elections Committee at office@fairvote.ca.
The Fair Vote Canada annual meeting will be held in Ottawa on Saturday, May 15. Details on speakers and the agenda will be available next month.
Fair Vote Canada
26 Maryland Blvd.
Toronto, ON M4C 5C9
Canada
Compilation:
1. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network & Letter from Em at Sauble Beach, ON on Bruce Power
2. Nuclear incident exposes 217 workers at Bruce Power
3. Don't wait for new technology to fix climate
4. New North Battleford plant to provide power to grid
5. Beyond Nuclear Denounces President Obama’s Decision to Transfer Financial and Safety Risks of New Reactors to US Taxpayers
6. GE's Nuclear Waste Plan & Background
7. US Media Omission: Iran Calls for Global Nuclear Disarmament & Other Related Articles
8. Jordanians sue Israel over Dimona nuclear plant
9. Premiers and governors to meet in Washington, February 20
10. How an L.A. Suburb Became One of the Most Toxic Towns
11. "The U.S. is a corporatocracy": Interview with Carolyn Baker by Von Lars Schall
12. The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy
13. Join the Climate Trial
14. Naomi Klein's Newsletter - February 2010
15. Fair Vote Canada National Council election is coming! Ottawa – May 15, 2010
========================
1. WATCH: "My Nuclear Neighbour" – Thurs. Feb. 18, 2010 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network & Letter from Em at Sauble Beach, ON on Bruce Power
Also Online: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/
The_Nature_of_Things/ID=1410952626
Imagine that one morning you wake up to find out your next-door neighbour may be a nuclear power plant.
There was a time when we thought atomic power would solve all our energy needs. That promise lost its lustre in cost overruns, accidents and cover-ups. Now after decades of fading into the background the nuclear power industry is poised for a comeback. In Canada, and around the world, the nuclear industry is rebranding itself as the only practical solution to global warming.
This is a story of global importance – it’s also a very local story. It’s a tale of two small towns: one in rural Ontario that has been a centre of nuclear power almost as long as there has been nuclear power. The other is in the legendary Peace country of Northern Alberta, where residents woke up one day to hear that Alberta’s first nuclear power facility might be moving in next door.
We travel with Lorraine Jensen and Brenda McSween from their farms in Peace River, Alberta to Kincardine, Ontario searching for answers to questions that are dividing their once harmonious community.
My Nuclear Neighbour is written and produced by Donna and Daniel Zuckerbrot for Reel Time Images.
The episode focuses on Bruce Power's efforts to build new reactors in the Peace River region of Alberta, Canada. Bruce Power owns and operates the largest nuclear power plant in North America, and the second biggest in the world, on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, just 50 miles from Michigan. The program will feature Montreal-based Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, who, along with Michael Keegan of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes of Monroe, Michigan co-chairs the Great Lakes United Nuclear-Free/Green Energy Task Force, upon which Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps has served for a decade.
= = = =
Nuclear Power Plant in the Peace River Area - From Emily in Sauble Beach, Ontario – February 15, 2010
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=20
Before I get to the “long type” here, I will let you know that as soon as I heard of Peace River – and that Bruce Power was interested in constructing a Nuclear Plant there - I have had, for some strange reason, not been able to let this go. For weeks now, I have felt in the very pit of my Being a need to Write, and then to connect with someone, and to share the little bit that I can share of my own experiences (as well as those of my Family), in living in an area that is very largely affected by Bruce Power. So, this a different side to the Nuclear Power Plant issue.
When we found out that David Suzuki/ The Nature of Things was airing an overview of the issues facing all of you in Peace River, I made a point of ensuring that I watched the broadcast on February 11. My intuition was shouting to me that there would be something there – something important – that I just HAD to see…And as always, I was not being led astray…As soon as I saw Lorraine Jensen’s face, I could feel this dear woman’s angst, angst that lasted throughout the entire hour-long program. It was Lorraine – perhaps more than anyone else who spoke during the program – that has catapulted me headlong into jotting notes, re-watching the show (we taped it), jotting more notes, and now – transcribing it all and getting this out to you as soon as I possibly could! So here goes!
Part One – The Affect on Local Economy(s)
Key phrase – as goes Bruce Power, so goes our financial economics
Had Lorraine and Brenda journeyed just a little bit further north of Kincardine, they would have happened upon the town of Port Elgin first, and then a little further north on the highway, Southampton as well. Both of these towns were originally ‘agricultural’ towns for the most part – which provided a variety of retail and professional services, grocery stores, churches, small movie houses, schools (primary and secondary) etc., and in Southampton a small hospital as well. The full-time residents were (and still are) families of course, but also retirees – some being farmers who have passed the family farm on to the next generation, and also summer tourists/cottagers who had fled the larger cities to enjoy a slower pace of life, clean air, and an enchanting mix of the beautiful shorelines of Lake Huron, coupled the plethora of wildlife and wild spaces that thrive here.
MORE: http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=20
======================
2. Nuclear incident exposes 217 workers at Bruce Power
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission finds dangerous radiation exposure came during reactor refurbishment in late November
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
See also: Obama announces $8-billion for nuclear plant
Energy: 'Nuclear renaissance' sparks clamour for uranium
Martin Mittelstaedt Published on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 1:11PM EST Last updated on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 2:50PM EST
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission says that as many as 217 workers may have been exposed to radioactivity at the Bruce nuclear power station on the shores of Lake Huron while refurbishing a reactor in late November.
It is believed to be one of the largest mass exposures to radiation at a Canadian nuclear site. The company operating the station, Bruce Power, says that according to its estimates none of the workers received doses exceeding regulatory limits, although there are concerns that the amounts may have come close to the maximum safe exposures.
The CNSC, Canada's nuclear safety watchdog, issued the estimate of the number of people that might have been affected in a regulatory filing today in Ottawa. The incident will be among those discussed by the regulator at a meeting of its board on Thursday.
In its filing, the CNSC said the workers were exposed to alpha contamination, a dangerous forms of radiation that if breathed in or ingested is a cancer risk. The dose calculations, done last month, “were conservatively interpreted as a potential indication that an action level for inhalation of airborne radioactivity may have been exceeded,” the CNSC said.
All of the radioactivity was contained in the station and there was no danger to the public or releases to the general environment around the plant.
Bruce Power is Canada's only private nuclear station operator. It leases two generating plants from the Ontario government, known as Bruce A and Bruce B.
The company is currently refurbishing the Bruce A station, a multi-year, $5.25-billion project that is one of the largest construction undertakings in Canada outside of the oil sands.
The overhaul of the station includes repairs to two reactors that are already about two years behind schedule.
The CNSC filing said it was issuing details of the worker exposure because it was “an occurrence or incident that receives, or may receive, substantial media coverage or that has a high public visibility.”
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
=============================
3. Don't wait for new technology to fix climate
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
wait+technology+climate/2539456/story.html
By Paul Hanley, The Star Phoenix February 9, 2010
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is promoting new technology as the way to fix climate problems. Neither wishful thinking nor legislation, he observed during his recent trip to the Davos forum, can alter the fact that fighting climate change is a costly, long-term objective dependent on technological solutions yet to be developed.
There's some truth to that, but it's not the whole truth. Legislation and regulation that support the use of current technology can provide cost-effective solutions right now.
A case in point: Ford is introducing a new Focus model in Europe that gets 74 MPG (combined city and highway) and emits just 99 grams of CO2 per kilometre. This is not an expensive hybrid vehicle, by the way. It is a traditional gas-powered car with some tweaks. Meanwhile, North American Focus models achieve less than 40 MPG combined city and highway driving.
The question is, why doesn't Ford make cars like that for us?
Apparently, it's partly to do with differences in regulations making it hard to build those engines to meet North American specs, but a large part of it involves different attitudes to climate change in Europe and North America.
Europeans take climate change more seriously, so European rules and regulations require European automakers to adhere to strict low-emissions standards, which is related to good gas mileage. After Europe passed legislation limiting carbon emissions, automakers swiftly revamped their cars to meet the standards. The same thing would happen here if our politicians showed some leadership. The industry would make a fuss and then comply.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
wait+technology+climate/2539456/story.html
=========================
4. New North Battleford plant to provide power to grid
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
North+Battleford+plant+provide+power+grid/2539396/story.html
SNN, Bloomberg News; Regina Leader-Post February 9, 2010
Northland Power Inc., an independent power producer based in Toronto, has been chosen to provide 261 megawatts (MW) of power to the provincial electrical grid by 2013, SaskPower announced Monday.
The $700-million facility will be located in the North Battleford area, with construction expected to begin in July. Northland, which operates two wind farms in Canada, agreed to build and run the natural gas-fired plant.
"Our top priority at SaskPower is to ensure that the province's residents and businesses have a reliable and sustainable supply of electricity for years to come," said Gary Wilkinson, vice-president of planning, environment and regulatory affairs for SaskPower. "This project will help us meet that need."
SaskPower and Northland Power have entered into a 20-year power purchase agreement for the facility, which will provide baseload generation for the province. Generation facilities that provide baseload power provide energy at a constant rate.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
North+Battleford+plant+provide+power+grid/2539396/story.html
============================
5. Beyond Nuclear Denounces President Obama’s Decision to Transfer Financial and Safety Risks of New Reactors to US Taxpayers
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/16-1
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 16, 2010 11:46 AM
CONTACT: Beyond Nuclear [1] Kevin Kamps, 240.462.3216
TAKOMA PARK, MD - February 16 - Beyond Nuclear today denounced President Obama’s granting of a conditional loan guarantee to Southern Nuclear Operating Company for the construction of new atomic reactors at its Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant site in Waynesboro, Georgia. Two new Westinghouse-Toshiba Advanced Passive (AP) 1000 reactors are proposed at Plant Vogtle. President Obama’s award comes despite an announcement by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in October of a major safety flaw with the AP1000 design.
An NRC media release dated October 15, 2009 [2] documents that the AP1000 shield building, as currently designed, is vulnerable to severe weather such as tornadoes and hurricanes, and natural disasters like earthquakes. This raises the concern that the design is also vulnerable to terrorist attacks such as intentionally crashing airliners. Thus, the shield building’s intended protection of the reactor’s primary radioactivity containment is questionable, as is its ability to provide radiation shielding during normal operations as well as to support a large emergency cooling water supply tank.
“It is utterly irresponsible of President Obama to risk public safety and the environment by financing the incomplete and flawed AP1000 design at Vogtle and, worse still, at taxpayers’ financial risk,” said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear. “Even if ultimately fixed, the AP1000’s major design flaw risks delays in construction and cost overruns, the same problems that delivered death blows to scores of atomic reactors three decades ago.”
The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that over half of new reactor owners will default on their loan repayments. The federal nuclear loan guarantees would finance up to 80% of the total project cost for a new reactor. Cost estimates for certain proposed new reactors in the U.S. have already surpassed $10 billion. The two new reactors at Vogtle are currently estimated by proponents to cost $14.5 billion, a figure expected by critics to significantly increase.
“Making federal atomic reactor loan guarantees conditional upon a Nuclear Regulatory Commission license won't protect U.S. taxpayers,” Kamps said. “The nuclear industry has a long history of defaulting on loans in the post-licensing period due to design flaws, construction mistakes, cost overruns, lengthy delays, and other problems that President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu cannot foresee, stumbling blocks which are not eliminated by NRC granting a construction and operating license,” Kamps added.
In the past, 21 atomic reactors were cancelled during construction, 22 were cancelled after receiving a license but before construction began, and 1 was even cancelled after construction had been completed.
President Obama’s award of billions of dollars in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees to Southern Nuclear is intended to resurrect the nuclear power industry, after a 36 year hiatus in the building of new atomic reactors in the U.S. This loan guarantee is the first to be disbursed from an $18.5 billion atomic reactor loan guarantee fund appropriated by Congress, and approved by President George W. Bush, at Christmas, 2007. The nuclear loan guarantee program was first authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
BACKGROUND
Due to Toshiba-Westinghouse’s proposed seventeenth revision, the AP1000 design cannot receive final NRC approval until a year from now, at the earliest. In addition, the Vogtle Units 3 and 4 combined Construction and Operating License Application (COLA) itself cannot receive NRC approval until mid-2011, at the earliest.
The two reactors currently operating at Vogtle were originally predicted to cost only $660 million to construct, but the price tag ultimately skyrocketed to $8.87 billion, a 13-fold or more than 1,000% cost overrun.
Earlier this year, DOE’s short list for nuclear loan guarantees was revealed by media reports to also include: Constellation Energy and Electricite de France, which propose a French Areva “Evolutionary Power Reactor” (EPR) at Calvert Cliffs, Maryland; NRG Energy and CPS Energy, which propose a Toshiba-Westinghouse “Advanced Boiling Water Reactor” (ABWR) at the South Texas Project nuclear plant near Bay City, Texas; and SCANA Corp. and South Carolina Electric and Gas, which propose an AP1000 at the Summer nuclear power plant in South Carolina.
Nuclear safety regulators in France, Finland, and the U.K. have recently questioned the safety of the EPR design. A nearly 75% cost overrun, and three year construction schedule delay, have resulted from 3,000 documented design and construction flaws at an EPR being built at Olkiluoto, Finland.
NRG and CPS are now battling in court over a $4-5 billion cost escalation in the price tag for the two ABWRs proposed at South Texas Project.
Thus, each of the new reactors under consideration by DOE for the initial nuclear loan guarantee awards is plagued by safety flaws, incomplete designs, skyrocketing costs, and/or construction delays. More information about this can be found at: http://www.psr.org/nuclear-bailout/ [3].
###
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
Beyond Nuclear Links: Homepage [1]Beyond Nuclear (Press Center) [4]
===========================
6. GE's Nuclear Waste Plan
http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/14/
general-electric-reactors-technology-ecotech-nuclear.html?boxes=Home
Jonathan Fahey, 02.16.10, 06:00 AM EST
The company wants to use radioactive waste as fuel in a next-generation reactor.
Eric Loewen won't even utter the words "spent nuclear fuel." That's the industry term of art for the nuclear fuel bundles that are pulled out of today's reactors after they're done making electricity.
Loewen, a nuclear engineer at General Electric ( GE - news - people ), doesn't see them as "spent" at all. He sees them as raw material for a new type of nuclear reactor. "It's used, but it's an energy asset," he says.
GE's joint venture with Hitachi, called GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, would like to build both the reactor and facility that creates the new fuel at a single site, which GE calls an advanced recycling center, or an ARC.
Loewen and GE suddenly have a captive audience. The Obama administration plans to offer $54 billion in loan guarantees to help the country start building new nuclear reactors again. (See "New Boost for Nukes") But the country's old plan of storing it deep underneath Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which taxpayers spent $9 billion thinking about, is dead. (Harry Reid, remember, is from Nevada.)
So, at the same time the administration announced expansion of the loan guarantee program, it revealed that it was commissioning a blue ribbon panel to study and make recommendations on how the country can deal with its nuclear waste.
Storing long-lived nuclear waste underground hasn't worked out so well. Whatever the politics at play, getting humans who live for 80 years to sign off on something that is supposed to be guaranteed to stay safe for 1 million isn't so easy.
MORE:
http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/14/
general-electric-reactors-technology-ecotech-nuclear.html?boxes=Home
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Behind the Scenes, GE’s Top Exec Confided Credit Woes
http://www.alternet.org/story/145581/
behind_the_scenes%2C_ge%E2%80%99s_top_exec_confided_credit_woes
Hank Paulson's new book details a very different recollection of events that persuaded FDIC Chair Sheila Bair to help guarantee over $70 billion in GE debt.
February 8, 2010 ProPublica / By Jeff Gerth
As the financial crisis worsened toward the end of 2008, CEO Jeffrey Immelt and other leaders at General Electric repeatedly assured the public that there was no need to worry about the company’s ability to access credit markets and refinance its massive debts as they came due.
But in private conversations that alarmed then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Immelt laid out a different picture of GE’s credit situation, according to Paulson’s new book about the crisis.
Instead, Paulson writes, Immelt on at least four occasions expressed worries about GE’s short-term debt, known as commercial paper, and eventually lobbied for access to special government guarantees for such debt.
To take one example: On Sept. 15, 2008, the day Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy, Paulson says he was "startled" when Immelt came to his office and told him GE was finding it "very difficult" to sell short-term debt "for any term longer than overnight." A day earlier, GE sent investors a letter (PDF) saying its ability to sell commercial paper was "robust."
Immelt, in a statement issued Friday by GE, said he "does not believe" the two discussed problems with GE commercial paper on Sept. 15, or in one previous talk. The company did not contest Paulson's account of other conversations about the issue a few weeks later.
If correct, the portrayals in Paulson’s book, "On the Brink: Inside the Race to Stop the Collapse of the Global Financial System," could spell trouble for GE in court, where shareholders are accusing Immelt and other company executives in civil suits of violating securities laws by misleading investors in the fall of 2008 about GE’s finances and withholding key information.
MORE:
http://www.alternet.org/story/145581/
behind_the_scenes%2C_ge%E2%80%99s_top_exec_confided_credit_woes
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
GE and Nuclear Energy
http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/produc ... ar_energy/
en/index.htm
Primary Activities
Today, nuclear energy supplies 16% of the world's electricity, avoiding the emission of about 2.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year that would otherwise be generated by fossil fuel solutions, such as supercritical pulverized coal.
GE has provided advanced and sophisticated technology for nuclear energy for over five decades. Four main product lines support this capability: new reactors, nuclear fuel, reactor services and performance services.
MORE: http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/produc ... ar_energy/
en/index.htm
=========================
7. US Media Omission: Iran Calls for Global Nuclear Disarmament
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/15-4
by Gavin Dahl Published on Monday, February 15, 2010 by Raw Story
The American public has not been informed by the US news media about highly newsworthy statements made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday February 12.
He said the era of nuclear weapons is over, suggesting Iran has no plans to build "inhumane" A-bombs. Ahmadinejad called for a world free of nuclear arms in an interview [1] with Russia's NTV channel.
"We believe that not only the Middle East but also the whole world should be free of nuclear weapons because we see such weapons as inhumane," he said.
"Today, no one can use a nuclear weapon and we believe that the US is taking a wrong move by stockpiling nuclear weapons," he added. "Those who claim that they are against nuclear weapons should dismantle their nuclear weapons first to prove that they are honest."
So far, the libertarian-leaning Antiwar.com has been the only American media outlet to cover his statements [2].
Considering Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's calls for sanctions [3] over Iran's nuclear program, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position [4] that new sanctions should be "crippling," one might think the US media would pay attention to Ahmadinejad's statements.
Instead, the media's Sarah Palin obsession [5] means that more Americans heard repeated calls to start a new war with Iran in the past week.
Iran has continually denied it plans to build nuclear weapons. The country's high-profile stance is that enriched uranium will be used for Tehran's medical reactor [6].
The interview Friday was given to Russian channel NTV, once critical of all-powerful Vladimir Putin, but now controlled by the state-owned Gazprom conglomerate. CNN published a timeline [7] of the changes to the station nine years ago.
© 2010 Raw Story
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Other Iran/Nuclear-related Articles - Feb. 16.10
http://english.aljazeera.net/
- Iran 'still open to nuclear deal'
- Turkey 'will aid Iran uranium swap'
- Israel urges Russia to act on Iran
- Which way Iran?
- Q&A: Uranium enrichment
- Timeline: Iran's nuclear programme
============================
8. Jordanians sue Israel over Dimona nuclear plant
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=214273
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:13:40 GMT
A Jordanian human rights group is set to sue Israel for the damage its nuclear facility in Dimona has caused to the environment and the residents in south Jordan.
The al-Jisr al-Arabi center has accused Israel of causing death, cancer and other afflictions among the Jordanian population residing in the area adjacent to the nuclear plant and thus prone to the toxic gases and radiation the facility emits.
The Amman-based human rights group has reportedly taken the preliminary steps necessary ahead of filing a legal lawsuit against Israel in the coming month with Jordanian legal bodies.
The center met with a number of the reactor's victims and "collected evidence and proof that attest to a rise in the number of cancer cases, especially among residents of the southern region, which is adjacent to the reactor."
"This is an ongoing and deliberate crime on Israel's part, which still causes cases of death and injury in large numbers among the Jordanians," said the center's General Manager Attorney Amjad Shammout.
MORE: http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=214273
==============================
9. Premiers and governors to meet in Washington, February 20
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 7:59 AM
The Canadian Press has reported that, "Canada's premiers will get a moment in the spotlight (on February 20) at the influential National Governors' Association winter meeting, a gathering that often serves as a guiding policy light for both Congress and the White House."
"It's the first-ever meeting between the association and its Canadian counterpart, the Council of the Federation. ...Regional premiers and governors often get together to discuss common issues, but it's unprecedented for all governors and premiers to sit down in a formal setting at such a prestigious event in the U.S. capital."
Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Alberta, and Newfoundland and Labrador will be represented at the meeting.
"Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall is co-hosting an event during the meeting entitled Common Border, Common Ground, focusing on touchy Canada-U.S. issues that include trade, border security and energy."
The Edmonton Sun adds that, "Promoting secure energy exports will be the main focus of a trip to Washington, D.C., for Alberta's international and intergovernmental minister (Iris Evans). Also on the agenda is promoting the importance of open trade with the U.S., officials said Thursday."
A Council of the Federation media release notes, "The mission will focus on trade and border issues, as well as on energy and the environment."
The Globe and Mail reports today that, "Border issues and trade will top the agenda, including the Buy American deal..."
The Canadian Press article is at http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/
20091218/Meeting_US_091218?hub=EdmontonHome.
The Edmonton Sun article is at http://m.edmontonsun.com/news/Alberta/12846141.1.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
===================================
10. How an L.A. Suburb Became One of the Most Toxic Towns
http://www.alternet.org/story/145508/
By Sena Christian, AlterNet Posted on February 10, 2010, Printed on February 16, 2010
In July 2007, Gail Shephard quit her job as an orthopedic technician. Her weakened muscles had made it too difficult for her to wash her hair or even pull up her pants in the morning. Now, Shephard, 55, takes two pain medications and Mirapex, a pill to treat Parkinson's disease, each day.
"I don't do anything," Shephard said. "I sit in the same chair. I dread getting up in the morning, it's so painful. I can't walk and I hold onto the walls to go the bathroom and back. And that is my entire day."
But Shephard doesn't have Parkinson's disease and doctors don't quite know how to diagnose her. She knows, however, that her ailments began shortly after February 2006, when she transferred to the new Kaiser Permanente facility built on the site of a former NASA plant, which comprised 160 acres of land in the Los Angeles suburb of Downey, Calif.
Shephard would come to find that she wasn't alone in her unexplained health problems. Several other former employees of the Kaiser Downey Medical Center and Downey Studios -- a film-production center also located at the site -- claim that they too became ill as a result of exposure to toxic contaminants left over from seven decades of military and aerospace research and manufacturing at the old NASA Downey Industrial Plant. The ailments have become so common that workers there coined a nickname: "Downey flu."
As for Shephard, the move to Downey aggravated her tendon and joint pain. Soon after, her feet and ankles ached: "My foot was so sensitive I couldn't put a blanket on it or let water touch it. I knew something was wrong, but I didn't know what."
That was only the beginning. Shephard had difficulty breathing, and experienced back spasms, dizzy spells and migraine headaches. Before long, she was urinating blood. Now, she has central nervous system damage and most of her body has turned numb.
Those who suffer from "Downey flu" claim that the city of Downey and Industrial Realty Group, which operate what's now called Downey Landing, failed to properly remediate the property or notify workers of mold, fungi and other toxic residue. The U.S. Department of Labor has identified 260 chemicals found at the NASA site, including arsenic, lead, uranium, plutonium, trichloroethylene and chromium.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145508/
==========================
11. "The U.S. is a corporatocracy": Interview with Carolyn Baker by Von Lars Schall
(from MM News (Germany): Feb. 2, 2010) Feb 03, 2010
http://transition-times.com/2010/02/03/
the-u-s-is-a-corporatocracy-interview-with-carolyn-baker/
US-historian and author Carolyn Baker is a critical commentator of social justice and environmental events. In an exclusive interview for MMNews she discusses the connection between 9-11 and Peak Oil, the coming food crisis, Permaculture and the Sustainability Movement in the U.S.
Carolyn Baker holds a PhD in Counseling, has published four books, was
Managing Editor for "From the Wilderness" (www.fromthewilderness.com) and for 11 years an adjunct professor of history and psychology.
Furthermore, she manages Speaking Truth to Power at www.carolynbaker.net, a website offering breaking alternative news and options for navigating unprecedented transitions. She published in February of last year her latest book "Sacred Demise. Walking the Spiritual Path of Industrial Civilization's Collapse", which is available at her website and at Amazon. She lives in Colorado, U.S.A.
MORE:
http://transition-times.com/2010/02/03/
the-u-s-is-a-corporatocracy-interview-with-carolyn-baker/
==============================
12. The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy
http://blackbook.foreignpolicy.ca/
Book by Yves Engler; 2009, Fernwood Publishing, Nova Scotia, 294 pp.
February 01, 2010 By Tamara Lorincz Tamara Lorincz's ZSpace Page
The Canadian government supplied the uranium for the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in World War II. Ottawa supported South African apartheid by allowing trade and commerce with the racist government there. With the support of its foreign service, Canadian mining companies weakened environmental regulations and propped up dictators in Central and South America. In 2004, Canada helped France and the United States overthrow the democratically elected government of Haiti.
Canadians will be shocked and saddened by Yves Engler's The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy, a critical examination of Canada's role in the world. Engler is a Montreal-based independent journalist/activist who has written two other books, Playing Left Wing: From Rink Rat to Student Radical and Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority (co-authored with Anthony Fenton).
It was Canada's role in the coup that ousted Haitian president Jean Bertrand Aristide, a populist priest to the poor, that caused Engler to question more broadly Canadian foreign policy. "Democracy," writes Engler in his new book, "requires citizens to keep themselves informed about what their government is doing. Canadians have a right and a responsibility to know, debate and to ultimately shape what is being done in our name around the world."
Engler describes the history of Canadian foreign policy in the Caribbean, the Middle East, Mexico, Central and South America, Central and South Asia, and Africa. Using declassified documents, government sources, and extensive research, he uncovers the darker motives and machinations behind Canadian decisions on international trade, foreign aid, and military operations.
The format of Engler's book is similar to American author William Blum's 1995 tour-de-force Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II. Like Blum's recounting of U.S. destabilizing interventions over the last 50 years, Engler indicts Canada's corporate elite and, in particular, Canadian banks and mining companies. He documents how companies —such as Barrick Gold, Inco, Falconbridge, Alcan, Placer Dome, Goldcorp, and others, with the financial assistance of the Bank of Nova Scotia, Royal Bank, and the Export Development Corporation—weakened environmental and labor standards, displaced indigenous populations, employed brutal private security guards, and contaminated land and water in the countries they were operating in —such as Honduras, Guatemala, Peru, and Papua New Guinea.
Engler notes that the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) aid follows Canadian corporate and military moves around the world. For instance, he discovered how CIDA funds were channeled through Canadian mining companies for their development projects in Ghana and the Philippines. Often these mining companies would not pay taxes or royalties and the Canadian government would force these poor countries to shoulder onerous economic policies, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund's structural adjustment programs that privatized and deregulated their public services.
He also condemns Canada's military transformation to war fighting and its integration with the U.S. military. He specifically cites the deployment of Canadian warships with the U.S. fleet in the Persian Gulf and the operation of Joint Task Force 2 (JTF2)—a secretive special combat force that has no parliamentary oversight—alongside the U.S. Unknown to Canadians, JTF2 has operated in Indonesia, Iraq, Haiti, Colombia, and Afghanistan (as an undeclared asset).
Engler concludes with his explanation for why Canadian foreign policy is the way it is and how to change it. Canada has a long tradition of supporting imperialism and colonialism, from fighting with the British Empire in the 19th century to integrating militarily with United States today. He argues that the Canadian corporate elite and defense establishment have disproportionately dictated its foreign policy to the exclusion of Parliament and the public. For instance, Canadians were not consulted on the Canada First Defence Strategy released last June that committed the federal government to spend $490 billion on the military over the next 20 years. Further, Engler blames the media for embedding with the military and not adequately investigating policies and actions abroad.
To change course, Engler's specific recommendations are to withdraw from NATO, cut the size and spending of the Canadian Armed Forces, and provide aid to the poorest people in the poorest countries. "Above all else it is key that Canadian aid should do no wrong," he demands.
Engler's recommendations align with Canadians' views. Last year, Environics commissioned a survey that found that the majority of Canadians believed their country should make a positive contribution and respect international bodies that provide mechanisms for dialogue and co-operation. An internal poll prepared for National Defence, and obtained by the Canadian press, found that most Canadians view their soldiers as peacekeepers and would rather see them helping disaster victims than fighting. "While citizens of Canada, we are also neighbours to everyone who shares this planet. We must be good neighbours. That should be the underlying premise of Canada's foreign policy," writes Engler.
To be good neighbors, The Black Book of Foreign Policy compels Canadians to stay informed, to care, and to hold their federal government to account.
Z - Tamara Lorincz is a member of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace.
From: Z Net - The Spirit Of Resistance Lives
URL: http://www.zcommunications.org/
the-black-book-of-canadian-foreign-policy-by-tamara-lorincz
=============================
13. Join the Climate Trial
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/08-9
Published on Monday, February 8, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
by Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, Terry Tempest Williams, and Dr. James Hansen
[The following was co-written by Naomi Klein, author of the #1 international bestseller The Shock Doctrine, Terry Tempest Williams, world renowned wildlife author [1], Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org [2] and author of The End Of Nature [3], and Dr. James Hansen, author of Storms of my Grandchildren [4], and who is regarded as the world's leading climatologist. All recognize the trial of Tim DeChristopher to be a turning point in the climate movement. Included are links to resources [5] for travel to Utah].
Dear Friends,
The epic fight to ward off global warming and transform the energy system that is at the core of our planet's economy takes many forms: huge global days of action, giant international conferences like the one that just failed in Copenhagen, small gestures in the homes of countless people.
But there are a few signal moments, and one comes next month, when the federal government puts Tim DeChristopher on trial in Salt Lake City. Tim--"Bidder 70"--pulled off one of the most creative protests against our runaway energy policy in years: he bid for the oil and gas leases on several parcels of federal land even though he had no money to pay for them, thus upending the auction. The government calls that "violating the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act" and thinks he should spend ten years in jail for the crime; we call it a noble act, a profound gesture made on behalf of all of us and of the future.
Tim's action drew national attention to the fact that the Bush Administration spent its dying days in office handing out a last round of favors to the oil and gas industry. After investigating irregularities in the auction, the Obama Administration took many of the leases off the table, with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar criticizing the process as "a headlong rush." And yet that same Administration is choosing to prosecute the young man who blew the whistle on this corrupt process.
We cannot let this stand. When Tim disrupted the auction, he did so in the fine tradition of non-violent civil disobedience that changed so many unjust laws in this country's past. Tim's upcoming trial is an occasion to raise the alarm once more about the peril our planet faces. The situation is still fluid--the trial date has just been set, and local supporters are making plans for how to mark the three-day proceedings. But they are asking people around the country to flood into Salt Lake City in mid-March. If you come, there will be ample opportunity for both legal protest and civil disobedience.
For example: Outside the courthouse, there will be a mock trial, with experts like NASA's Jim Hansen providing the facts that should be heard inside the chambers. We don't want Tim on trial--we want global warming on the stand.
Demonstrators will be using the time-honored tactics of civil disobedience to make their voices heard outside the courthouse in an effort to prevent "business as usual"--it's business as usual that's wrecking the earth.
There will be evening concerts and gatherings, including a "mini-summit" to share ideas on how the climate movement should proceed in the years ahead. This is a people's movement that draws power from around the globe; for a few days its headquarters will be Salt Lake City.
You can get the most up-to-date news at climatetrial.com [6], including schedules for non-violence training, and information about legal representation. If you're coming, bring not only your passion but also your creativity--we need lots of art and music to help make the point that we won't sit idly by while the government tries to scare the environmental movement into meek cooperation. This kind of trial is nothing but intimidation--and the best answers to intimidation are joy and resolve. That's what we'll need in Utah.
We know it's short notice. Some of us won't be able to make it to Utah because we have other commitments or are limiting travel, and if you're in the same situation, climatetrial.com [6] will also have details of solidarity actions in other parts of the country. If you can contribute money to help make the week's events possible, click here [7]. But more than your money we need your body, your brains, and your heart. In a landscape of little water, where redrock canyons rise upward like praying hands, we can offer our solidarity to the wild: wild lands and wild hearts. Tim DeChristopher deserves and needs our physical and spiritual support in the name of a just and vibrant community.
Thank you for standing with us,
Naomi Klein,
Bill McKibben
Terry Tempest Williams
Dr. James Hansen
=================================
14. Naomi Klein's Newsletter - February 2010
http://www.naomiklein.org/main
In February's Newsletter:
Naomi's Latest Column for The Nation— "Haiti: A Creditor, Not a Debtor"
Video Dispatch from Haiti: The Politics of Reconstruction
Activist Call Out: We Must Stand with Tim DeChristopher
Don’t Miss—Naomi to Speak in Toronto about Climate Debt
Watch Naomi in Conversation with Raj Patel and Amy Goodman
Looking For a Different Take on the Vancouver Olympics?
========================
15. Fair Vote Canada National Council election is coming! Ottawa – May 15, 2010
http://www.fairvote.ca/
Are you a member?
Are you interested in being a candidate?
In April, members in good standing of Fair Vote Canada will be eligible to cast votes and run for office in the election of FVC’s National Council. Members will use the single transferable vote (a proportional voting system) to elect candidates to fill seven seats on the 15-seat National Council.
To vote or run, you must be a member in good standing, meaning your annual membership dues have been paid. We encourage members from all parts of the country, all walks of life and all points on the political spectrum to consider candidacy. Most National Council business is conducted by email, with periodic conference calls and one in-person meeting in conjunction with the AGM.
New members joining by February 23 will be eligible to vote and run for office. The candidate nomination deadline is March 15 (candidates are self-nominated).
Those interested in running or with questions are invited to contact the Elections Committee at office@fairvote.ca.
The Fair Vote Canada annual meeting will be held in Ottawa on Saturday, May 15. Details on speakers and the agenda will be available next month.
Fair Vote Canada
26 Maryland Blvd.
Toronto, ON M4C 5C9
Canada
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS (1): Feb. 19.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:27 am
NUKE NEWS (1): Feb. 19.10
Compilation:
1. A Message from Angela Bischoff of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance
2. Four Pickering B Nuclear Reactors to be Closed Permanently in Ten Years Time
3. Radiation exposure results for workers at Ont. power plant may take months
4. Recommended Viewing: Kevin Kamps on Washington Review – Feb. 17.10
5. Obama Administration Announces Loan Guarantees to Construct New Nuclear Power Reactors in Georgia
6. Report: Unsuccessful 'Fast Breeder' Is No Solution for Long-Term Reactor Waste Disposal Issues
7. Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
==========================
1. A Message from Angela Bischoff of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance
As you may know the province of Ontario has asked the federal gov’t to subsidize the purchase of 2 new nuclear reactors to be built at Darlington.
We don’t think federal taxpayers in Halifax, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Parry Sound or Montreal should pay for our costly electrical supply.
And if the feds don’t subsidy the purchase, it’ll die on the drawing board!
Would you consider ordering free copies of this leaflet: http://ontariosgreenfuture.ca/CostlyNukes_12_09.pdf and distributing it to your friends around the country?
I’ll mail you multiple copies for FREE.
They contain postcards to Harper and Ignatieff saying essentially “don’t subsidize ON’s nukes”.
Thanks for your help getting these out across the country.
Send me your address and I’ll mail them out to you pronto.
Thanks…
Angela Bischoff
angela@cleanairalliance.org
===========================
2. Four Pickering B Nuclear Reactors to be Closed Permanently in Ten Years Time
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 9:10 PM
Background:
This is very big news. The eight reactors at Pickering have long been regarded as the heart of Ontario's nuclear power program.
Now OPG (Ontario Power Generation) has decided not to refurbish the four Pickering B reactors, choosing instead to shut the down permanently over the next decade.
The four Pickering A reactors were shut down in 1997 (along with three of the four Bruce A reactors) to allow time for the nuclear division of Ontario Hydro (as it was then called) to deal with thousands of unresolved safety-related maintenance problems that had accumulated.
Six years later, the decision was made to restart the four Pickering A reactors. The entire restart was to cost $800 million and take about six months. But after $1,200
million and 18 months of effort, only one of the four reactors (Unit 4) was successfully restarted.
After much angst, further delay, and another billion dollars, a second Pickering A unit was restarted (Unit 1).
At this point it was decided to mothball Units 2 and 3of Pickering A permanently. The two restarted reactors have been operating poorly, producing only about 60 percent of their rated electrical output.
Thus, after spending over two-and-a-half times as much money as projected for the entire Pickering A restart project, only 30% of its electrical output was restored.
Now, with the decision not to extend the operating lifetime of any of the Pickering B reactors, it appears that Pickering will have only two geriatric reactors operating in a ten year's time, and none at all after about 15 years (in 2025).
Gordon Edwards.
===============================
OPG Moves to Planning Phase of Darlington Refurbishment
Pickering B to Enter Final Decade of Operation with $300-Million Investment
Ontario Power Generation (OPG) Press Release, February 16 2010
http://www.opg.com/news/releases/
100211%20Nuclear%20Investment%20Strategy.asp
Durham Region – Today, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) announced a two-part investment strategy for its nuclear generating stations in Durham Region.
First, OPG will proceed with a detailed planning phase for the mid-life refurbishment of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station east of Toronto, with construction expected to start in about 2016. The business decision to move forward with an investment in Darlington comes after very positive outcomes of initial studies on the plant’s condition and continued strong operating performance. The next phase of the process will include an Environmental Assessment, an Integrated Safety Review and an Integrated Improvement Plan that will define the scope, cost and schedule of the refurbishment project.
OPG will also invest $300 million to ensure the continued safe and reliable performance of its Pickering B station for approximately 10 years. Following this, OPG will begin the longer term decommissioning process as refurbishment for Pickering B station will not be pursued.
The first step in this process is to layup the reactors and place them into safe storage. Pickering staff will have future opportunities placing the Pickering units in a safe storage state, at the Darlington refurbishment and operations, or at the potential new build at Darlington.
Extensive safety, environmental and equipment reliability studies conducted at the station concluded the Pickering plant can continue to operate safely and reliably to meet the province’s energy needs through to 2020. OPG has indicated to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that later this year it will file a Continued Operation Plan that takes Pickering B to its end of life.
“As Ontario’s generating company, OPG’s nuclear and hydro fleets are the backbone of the provincial electricity system,” said Brad Duguid, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure. “I support this business investment strategy as it aligns with the government’s vision for a clean energy future. It is also respectful of employees and it will ensure continued economic benefits to the people of Durham Region and Ontario.”
“OPG is committed to continued business investment in Durham Region to meet the electricity production needs of Ontarians,” said Tom Mitchell, OPG’s President and CEO. “Investing in refurbishment at Darlington and continuing operation at Pickering B provide the best value for the people of Ontario.”
“The key to a successful refurbishment is having a clear understanding of the scope and cost of the work we need to do well before we start construction,” said Bill Robinson, Executive Vice President Nuclear Projects.
In planning the Darlington refurbishment, OPG will build on the accomplishments and lessons learned during the Pickering A restart and the Pickering safe storage project. The restart of Pickering Unit 1 was completed on time and on budget, and the safe storage project for Units 2 and 3 is currently tracking on budget and on time for completion this
year. This phase of the Darlington refurbishment will also reflect the same thorough process undertaken for the Pickering B Environmental Assessment and Integrated Safety Review.
OPG continues to proceed with work that supports the construction and operation of a new nuclear station located at the Darlington site. The Environmental Assessment and site license work for a potential new build will continue in parallel with the above investment activities. -30-
For More Information, contact:
OPG Media Relations 416-592-4008 or 1-877-592-4008
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ontario Power Generation confirms Pickering nuclear station to close in 10 years
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1002 ... nt_nukes_1
The Canadian Press. Tue Feb 16 2010 Section: Quebec-Ontario Regional General News
Byline: BY KEITH LESLIE
TORONTO -- Ontario Power Generation announced Tuesday that it will spend $300 million to keep the Pickering nuclear station open for another decade before it's mothballed, and will spend an undisclosed amount to refurbish the Darlington nuclear station.
The Darlington refurbishment is good news in terms of jobs and in terms of Ontario's long-term electricity supply, said Energy Minister Brad Duguid, even though he could provide no details on the cost of the rebuild that is scheduled to start in 2016.
"There's still more work to be done to identify those numbers,'' Duguid told reporters.
"Our energy partners have looked at the various alternatives and their recommendations both in Pickering and Darlington is that this is the most cost-effective way to move forward to ensure that we produce this energy.''
The New Democrats said either the government and Ontario Power Generation were guessing at the estimated cost of the nuclear refurbishment, or were withholding the figures from the public.
"Absolutely people should know what the costs are and what the estimates are,'' said NDP energy critic Peter Tabuns. "You don't make a multibillion-dollar decision based on a guess.''
MORE: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1002 ... nt_nukes_1
======================
[b]3. Radiation exposure results for workers at Ont. power plant may take months
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Radiation+exposure+results+workers+power+plant+take+months/
2581916/story.html
By Linda Nguyen, Canwest News ServiceFebruary 18, 2010 1:55 PM
TORONTO — Nearly 200 workers at an Ontario nuclear power station will have to wait at least four months before they know if they were contaminated with radioactivity from an accidental release in November.
News of the wait time was revealed at public hearing Thursday in Ottawa between executives at Bruce Power, the country's only private nuclear station operator, and board members from the industry's watchdog, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
Initially, the company estimated 19 workers, who were directly working on a restart of the Bruce A Unit 1 reactor, were potentially affected by "low doses" of alpha radiation during the release on Nov. 26, 2009.
Alpha radiation contamination can cause sickness and lead to cancer risks if ingested or inhaled in large amounts.
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Radiation+exposure+results+workers+power+plant+take+months/
2581916/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Radiation release may have affected 217
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Radiation+release+have+affected/2574790/story.html
By Linda Nguyen, Canwest News Service February 17, 2010
At least 217 workers at the Bruce Power nuclear plant northwest of Toronto were potentially exposed to a release of radiation last November, possibly the largest radioactive contamination in Canada, according to the country's national nuclear watchdog.
The estimate was revealed in a regulatory filing Tuesday in Ottawa, ahead of a meeting scheduled later this week with board members from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Bruce Power, which is the country's only private nuclear station operator.
Initially, Bruce Power believed only 19 workers were potentially affected by the radioactive release, but that figure jumped to 190 late last week. It's now being put at 217 people by the commission.
And that number could still be expanded, said Bruce Power spokesperson Steve Cannon.
"We have people who are being tested and the figure could be more than that," he said. "We started with people who were most directly involved in the work to see if they showed any signs of exposure."
According to the report, the radioactive release was likely caused by "corrosion" in the Bruce A Unit 1 reactor at the station located on Lake Huron in Tiverton, Ont.
The alpha radiation was discovered during a restart of the reactor by work crews on Nov. 26. Alpha radiation contamination can cause sickness and lead to cancer risks if ingested or inhaled in large amounts. Tests on affected workers are currently underway.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Radiation+release+have+affected/2574790/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Nuclear watchdog investigates possible mass radiation exposure
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
As many as 217 workers involved in November incident at Ontario plant, according to filing from Nuclear Safety Commissiony has it taken so long for this information to become public?
Martin Mittelstaedt Environment Reporter
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail Published on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 1:11PM EST Last updated on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 11:10PM EST
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission says as many as 217 workers may have been exposed to radioactivity at the Bruce nuclear power station on the shores of Lake Huron while refurbishing a reactor in late November.
It is believed to be one of the largest mass exposures to radiation at a Canadian nuclear site.
The station operator, Bruce Power, said a preliminary review of the radiation exposure indicates no one received an excessive dose. The company is taking the incident “very seriously,” said John Peevers, a Bruce spokesman, while cautioning that “all indications are that there is nothing there approaching the regulatory limit” for radiation.
The CNSC, Canada's nuclear safety watchdog, indicated the estimated number of people who may have been affected in a regulatory filing Tuesday in Ottawa. The incident will be discussed by its commissioners at a meeting Thursday and conditions around the reactor are being monitored by CNSC staff.
The CNSC said the workers were exposed to alpha contamination, a dangerous form of radiation that, if breathed in or ingested, poses a risk of cancer. Preliminary dose calculations indicated that an “action level for inhalation of airborne radioactivity may have been exceeded,” the CNSC said.
“Preliminary dose calculations were conservatively interpreted as a potential indication that an action level for inhalation of airborne radioactivity may have been exceeded,” the CNSC said.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Admit nuclear risks, sociologist advises
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Admit+nuclear+risks+sociologist+advises/2465672/story.html
By Elise Stolte, Edmonton Journal January 20, 2010
EDMONTON — Nuclear experts trying to reassure the population that risks from nuclear power are minimal are missing the point, says a university social scientist.
As experts mount education campaigns, pull out charts and try to win on the strength of their data, people turn away, unable to believe they're getting a full answer, Debra Davidson, a sociologist in the department of rural economics at the University of Alberta, said Wednesday.
The only way government and industry leaders are going to win people back is by admitting the debate is not black and white, she said. "I know that's a fine political line to walk on."
Proponents worry if they come out and say "accidents are possible," they will create fear and no one will to accept their product.
"What I would say as a social scientist is exactly the opposite," said Davidson. "If you want to alleviate the concerns of members of the public then acknowledge the concerns. They're already scared. They're more likely to be afraid of people who say, that will never happen."
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Admit+nuclear+risks+sociologist+advises/2465672/story.html
=========================
4. Recommended Viewing: Kevin Kamps on Washington Review – Feb. 17.10
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/ ... E/A/29678/
Kevin+Kamps+Beyond+Nuclear+Alex+Flint+Nuclear+Energy+Inst.aspx
Kevin Kamps of "Beyond Nuclear" did a superb job of discussing nuclear issues on a live TV broadcast on C-Span Wednesday morning.
He was a guest on "Washington Review" along with Alex Flint of the Nuclear Energy Institute.
Scroll down to "recent interviews" and click on the hot-link that starts with Kevin Kamps' name under Wednesday, February 17.
http://www.c-span.org/Series/Washington-Journal.aspx
You can also catch Kevin on Al-Jazeera TV. Scroll down to the video with Obama's picture.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/
2010/02/2010216185539168789.html
~ ~ ~ ~
Open the link to an animated (but serious) political cartoon in the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/op ... 72010.html
============================
5. Obama Administration Announces Loan Guarantees to Construct New Nuclear Power Reactors in Georgia
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... r-reactors
US DOE Press Release, February 16 2010
Summary: President Obama today announced that the Department of Energy has offered conditional commitments for a total of $8.33 billion in loan guarantees for the construction and operation of two new nuclear reactors at a plant in Burke, Georgia. The project is scheduled to be the first U.S. nuclear power plant to break ground in nearly three decades.
The two new 1,100 megawatt Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactors at the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant will supplement the two existing reactor units at the facility. According to industry projections, the project will create approximately 3,500 onsite construction jobs. Once the nuclear reactors become operational, the project will create 800 permanent jobs.
Project sponsors include Georgia Power Company (GPC), Oglethorpe Power Corporation (OPC), the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG) and the City of Dalton, Georgia (Dalton).
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized DOE to issue loan guarantees for projects that avoid, reduce, or sequester air pollutants or anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and employ new or significantly-improved technologies as compared to technologies in service in the United States at the time the guarantee is issued. These are the first conditional commitments for loan guarantees to be offered by DOE for a nuclear power facility since enactment of the 2005 law. The Department's Loan Programs Office administers the loan guarantee program.
More Information:
* The full press release is at http://energy.gov/news/8643.htm
* A statement from President Obama on the guarantees is at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... m-maryland
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
A few things most people don’t know about Obama’s nuclear power
loan guarantee program [/b
]http://blogs.alternet.org/nirsnet/2010/02/17/
a-few-things-most-people-don%E2%80%99t-know-about-obama%E2%80%99s-nuclear-power-loan-guarantee-program/
President Obama Feb 16 announced an $8.3 billion loan guarantee to Southern Company to support construction of two new nuclear reactors in Georgia.
Here are a few things most people don’t know about this program, and that have not been widely reported in the media:
*Most people assume a loan guarantee is kind of like when your dad co-signed the loan for your first car. In fact, for nuclear reactors, taxpayers are not only guaranteeing the loans, they are providing the loans. Yep, that’s right, the money—which a Southern Company press release acknowledges—will come from the little-known Federal Financing Bank. We give the money to wealthy nuclear utilities, and then we promise that if they don’t pay it back, we will. Wow, great deal, especially with billions of dollars at stake.
*The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that 50%+ reactor projects receiving loan guarantees will default on their loans. That’s bad enough. It may be worse that Energy Secretary Steven Chu admitted upon announcing the first $8.3 billion loan guarantee Feb 16 that he did not know of this study—the only study ever conducted for Congress on the likelihood of utility default on nuclear loan guarantees.
MORE:
http://blogs.alternet.org/nirsnet/2010/02/17/
a-few-things-most-people-don%E2%80%99t-know-about-obama%E2%80%99s-nuclear-power-loan-guarantee-program/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
[b]Excuse Me, But That Nuclear Plant Has Its Hand On Your Wallet
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gsi ... y_id=57400
February 17, 2010
One way to think about an important choice you're about to make is to ask, "What's the worst thing that could happen?"
So let's say you're considering putting up a huge solar panel farm in the middle of Georgia. And I mean really huge, like $8 billion huge. The biggest solar farm ever built. Big. Got it? And what's the worst thing you could imagine that could happen? A cloudy day? Rust? A tornado? A plane crashes into it?
Wow. All those things would be pretty bad, no kidding. But for not very much money that gigantic solar farm would be repaired and it would go right back to making cheap power.
Now let's think about putting that same $8 billion into a subsidy for a new nuclear power plant in Georgia. Assuming the only steel mill in the world (in Japan) that can forge the containment vessel has the capacity, the reactor finally gets built and fired up. After a couple of years there are concrete vats of spent nuclear fuel sitting around near the plant, several trillion gallons of water have been used to cool the plant, killing all life in those trillion gallons, and there's a hot nuclear core in the reactor making steam and turning turbines.
Now ask yourself the question. What's the worst thing that could happen? Plane crash, deliberate or accidental? Earthquake? Design flaw? Construction flaw? Operator error? What's the potential damage in dollars? How about $600 billion, according to the Sandia National Laboratory and reported by PublicCitizen.
That $600 billion potential liability would require some pretty amazing insurance policy, don't you think? You might even guess that insurance costs explain why those nuclear plants are so expensive to build and maintain. But you'd be wrong. The nuclear industry is required to maintain a little cooperative that covers up to $10.5 billion of liability. That's it.
MORE: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gsi ... y_id=57400
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Five Reasons NOT to Invest in Nuclear Power
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/17-4
by Robert Alvarez
Published on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 by Huffington Post
Yesterday, President Obama announced that the Energy department will provide an $8.3 billion loan guarantee to the Southern Co. for its proposed nuclear power plant near Augusta, GA. "The loan guarantee program for new nuclear power plants not only will further the nation's commitment to clean energy, Obama said, "but also will assist in creating jobs in American communities." Unfortunately, nuclear energy isn't safe or clean and it's too costly for the nation.
News coverage has been mostly supportive and, in some cases, bordering on cheerleading. In his blog for the Atlantic magazine, Editor Daniel Indiviglio laid out [1] "five reasons to cheer Obama's ambition." Let's take a closer look at these "five reasons."
Reason #1: "Nuclear power is a known quantity. The U.S. has been successfully using this energy source for a very long time."
Nuclear power is certainly well known to Wall Street, which despite its recent debacles, has refused to fund power reactors for more than 30 years because of their financial risks. Reactor construction costs climbed as high as 380 percent above expectations during the boom period for nuclear in the 1970s. Nuclear investors eventually wrote off about $17 billion. Consider the 1979 Three Mile Island Accident, in which TMI investors lost about $2 billion in about an hour, when the reactor core started to melt. Nuclear energy has depended primarily on the financial burden being born by the tax payer and rate payer. This is hardly a success story.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/17-4
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Obama Breaks Campaign Promise; Gives $8 Billion to the Nuclear Industry
http://muracco.com/blog/?p=105
If you thought taxpayer-backed bailouts of Corporate America were over, guess again.
Yesterday President Obama broke a campaign promise and handed $8 billion to the nuclear industry in the form of a loan guarantee for dirty and dangerous nuclear reactors.
We need your help to push back.
As a presidential candidate, Obama said he would consider supporting new reactors only if we first solved the problems of security, waste, and proliferation. These problems have not been solved. New reactors remain a threat to public safety and the environment.
New reactors mean more radioactive waste piling up in populated areas around the country -- waste that will be dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years. That's one reason the FBI has called nuclear facilities "target rich" environments for terrorists.
And the nuclear industry's safety problems are myriad. Just last month, dangerously high levels of radioactive tritium -- a cancer-causing carcinogen -- were found leaking from pipes at a reactor in Vermont and polluting groundwater near the Connecticut River. Worse, there is still no guarantee we can avoid a Three Mile Island-type incident or a full-scale Chernobyl-like disaster.
But safety isn't the only problem. After more than 50 years of depending on federal subsidies for its survival, the nuclear industry still can't stand on its own. Even Wall Street bankers have concluded that new reactors are too risky to invest in, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the risk of default on new nuclear loans is "well above fifty percent." So why is President Obama asking taxpayers to foot the bill?
Taxpayers have bailed out enough failing industries; we don't need to add dirty and dangerous nuclear to the list. Will you help us to stop this nuclear industry bailout by supporting Friends of the Earth with a contribution of $25 or more today?
With safer, more reliable alternatives available, including wind and solar power and greater energy efficiency, there's no reason to blow our tax dollars on dangerous new reactors. We need investments in truly green energy, not false solutions.
Friends of the Earth is helping to lead this fight, both on the ground and on the air. Last year, Senator Bob Bennett credited our TV ads with knocking an up-to-$50-billion bailout of the nuclear industry out of the federal stimulus package. And in just the last few days, we've carried the argument against a nuclear bailout through outlets including Time Magazine, USA Today, The Associated Press, CNN and the NBC Nightly News.
For more than a year, Friends of the Earth's Tom Clements, an experienced anti-nuclear advocate, has been waging a multifaceted campaign on the ground in South Carolina to stop four proposed reactors from being built there. Tom is organizing grassroots activists, formally intervening in the regulatory process, and bringing a potentially precedent-setting lawsuit to the state Supreme Court this spring.
We need your financial support to keep this fight going. Please make a contribution today.
Thank you,
Erich Pica
President, Friends of the Earth
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Obama's Nuclear Boondoggle
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010 ... es-nuclear
— By Kate Sheppard, Mother Jones, Wed Feb. 17, 2010
In its eagerness to woo Republicans with nuclear-friendly policies, the Obama administration plans to hand out $54.5 billion in government-backed loans to kick-start a nuclear renaissance. On Tuesday, it announced the first beneficiary of this largesse—and apparently the best candidate it could find was a proposed plant that's been put on hold by federal regulators due to serious safety concerns.
The Department of Energy (DOE) will underwrite a loan of $8.3 billion to Southern Company's two planned reactors at Plant Vogtle in Burke County, Georgia—"just the first of what we hope will be many new nuclear projects," Carol Browner, the White House adviser on climate and energy, told reporters on Tuesday. Browner said the loan
guarantee demonstrates the administration's commitment to working with Republicans on energy; handing major concessions to nuclear interests has been a key part of the Obama administration's strategy to pass a climate bill this year.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Obama's Atomic Blunder
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/17-5
Published on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
by Harvey Wasserman
As Vermont seethes with radioactive contamination and the Democratic Party crumbles, Barack Obama has plunged into the atomic abyss.
In the face of fierce green opposition and withering scorn from both liberal and conservative budget hawks, Obama has done what George W. Bush could not---pledge billions of taxpayer dollars for a relapse of the 20th Century's most expensive technological failure.
Obama has announced some $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for two new reactors planned for Georgia. Their Westinghouse AP-1000 designs have been rejected by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as being unable to withstand natural cataclysms like hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes.
The Vogtle site was to originally host four reactors at a total cost of $600 million; it wound up with two at $9 billion.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/17-5
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
WATCH: “A Bad Day for America”: Anti-Nuclear Activist Harvey Wasserman Criticizes Obama Plan to Fund Nuclear Reactors
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/18/nukes
February 18, 2010
President Obama has pledged $8.3 billion in loan guarantees needed to build the first nuclear reactors in nearly three decades. The move, along with a tripling of nuclear loan guarantees in the President’s budget, represents a new federal commitment to the nuclear power sector. We speak to independent journalist and longtime anti-nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman, who helped found the grassroots movement against nuclear power in the United States in the 1970s. [includes rush transcript]
Guest:
Harvey Wasserman, independent journalist and longtime anti-nuclear activist. In the early 1970s, he helped found the grassroots movement against nuclear power in the United States. He is the editor of nukefree.org and is a senior adviser to Greenpeace USA.
Related Links Nuke Free.org
MORE: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/18/nukes
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
“Nuclear Power Plant Loan Guarantees: An Unacceptable Risk,” by Mary Byrd Davis http://www.earthisland.org/ecoperspecti ... -16-10.pdf
Last year 9,992 MW of wind power was installed in the United States. That is the equivalent of more than eight nuclear reactors of the type being built at Vogtle 3 and 4, which just received a federal loan guarantee from the Department of Energy. The award is ironic, since the cost of Vogtle 1 and 2 helped to bring an end to the expansion of nuclear power in the 1970s and 1980s when the estimated cost of $660 million for four reactors ballooned to an expenditure of $8.7 billion for two.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
HELP STOP TRIPLING OF NUCLEAR LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM!
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org
HELP STOP TRIPLING OF NUCLEAR LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM!
WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TODAY AND JOIN IN ON NATIONAL CALL-CONGRESS DAY WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24!
February 18, 2010
Dear Friends,
By now you probably know that on Tuesday President Obama personally announced conditional approval of an $8.3 billion loan guarantee for the construction of two new reactors at the Vogtle site in Georgia.
And you also probably know that Obama has proposed tripling the loan guarantee program for new reactors in his FY 2011 budget, to $54 billion.
What you may not know about the Vogtle deal is that we taxpayers are not just providing loan guarantees, we're providing the actual loans, through the Federal Financing Bank. And you also may not know that the Southern Company has not yet accepted the conditions of the loan--and for various reasons, it may not. In other words, it's not a done deal.
And neither is a $54 billion loan guarantee program a done deal. Congress has to approve this proposal. Twice last year, with your help, we beat back efforts to increase the loan guarantee program. We can do it again!
*The first step is to send a letter to your Representative now.
*The second step is to spread the word and encourage as many people as possible to send in letters. We need to speak very LOUDLY on this one!
*The third step is to get ready for National Call-Congress Day on Wednesday, February 24. We've done this before and thousands of you have called. This time it will be even bigger, because this is a coordinated effort with many groups: NIRS, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Beyond Nuclear, Friends of the Earth, and you!
So prepare yourself (and we'll send some new talking points early next week), activate your e-mail lists and phone trees, tell your friends and family members. Let's keep the phones ringing in both the House and Senate all day long next Wednesday.
Reaction to the Vogtle loan guarantee, and to the proposed tripling of the program, already has been strong. You can see NIRS' press releases, and statements by Ralph Nader, Sierra Club, PSR, etc. on the front page of our website: www.nirs.org.
Here is a link to a story in today's New York Times titled Environmental Advocates Are Cooling on Obama. Here is a link to a story on the Facing South site. And here is a very good piece from Time Magazine. These are typical of the kinds of stories we've been seeing.
Now we need to follow up the strong reaction to Obama's nuclear plans with strong action:
Please write your representatives here.
Plan to be part of National Call-Congress Day Wednesday, February 24.
And if there is anything we can do to help you, let us know.
Thanks for all you do,
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
====================
6. Report: Unsuccessful 'Fast Breeder' Is No Solution for Long-Term Reactor Waste Disposal Issues
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/
report--unsuccessful-fast-breeder-is-no-solution-for-long-term-reactor-waste-disposal-issues-84610032.html
After Over $50 Billion Spent by U.S., Japan, Russia, UK, India and France, No Commercial Model Found High Cost, Unreliability, Major Safety Problems and Proliferation Risks All Seen as Major Barriers to Use
PRINCETON, N.J., Feb. 17 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/
Hopes that the "fast breeder"– a plutonium-fueled nuclear reactor designed to produce more fuel than it consumed -- might serve as a major part of the long-term nuclear waste disposal solution are not merited by the dismal track record to date of such sodium-cooled reactors in France, India, Japan, the Soviet Union/Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, according to a major new study from the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM).
For the full text of the IPFM study, go to http://www.fissilematerials.org
Titled "Fast Breeder Reactor Programs: History and Status," the PFM report concludes: "The problems [with fast breeder reactors] … make it hard to dispute Admiral Hyman Rickover's summation in 1956, based on his experience with a sodium-cooled reactor
developed to power an early U.S. nuclear submarine, that such reactors are 'expensive to build, complex to operate, susceptible to prolonged shutdown as a result of even minor malfunctions, and difficult and time-consuming to repair.'"
Plagued by high costs, often multi-year downtime for repairs (including a 15-year reactor restart delay in Japan), multiple safety problems (among them often catastrophic sodium fires triggered simply by contact with oxygen), and unresolved proliferation risks, "fast breeder" reactors already have been the focus of more than $50 billion in development spending, including more than $10 billion each by the U.S., Japan and Russia. As the IPFM report notes: "Yet none of these efforts has produced a reactor that is anywhere near economically competitive with light-water reactors … After six decades and the expenditure of the equivalent of tens of billions of dollars, the promise of breeder
reactors remains largely unfulfilled and efforts to commercialize them have been steadily cut back in most countries."
MORE:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/
report--unsuccessful-fast-breeder-is-no-solution-for-long-term-reactor-waste-disposal-issues-84610032.html
OTHER KEY FINDINGS
The IPFM report also found:
• The rationale for breeder reactors is no longer sound. "The rationale for pursuing breeder reactors sometimes explicit and sometimes implicit was based on the following key assumptions:
1. Uranium is scarce and high-grade deposits would quickly become depleted if fission power were deployed on a large scale;
2. Breeder reactors would quickly become economically competitive with the light-water reactors that dominate nuclear power today;
3. Breeder reactors could be as safe and reliable as light-water reactors; and,
4. The proliferation risks posed by breeders and their 'closed' fuel cycle, in which plutonium would be recycled, could be managed.
Each of these assumptions has proven to be wrong."
• Significant safety issues are unresolved. "Sodium's major disadvantage is that it reacts violently with water and burns if exposed to air. The steam generators, in which molten sodium and high-pressure water are separated by thin metal, have proved to be one of the most troublesome features of breeder reactors. Any leak results in a reaction that can rupture the tubes and lead to a major sodium-water fire.….
• A large fraction of the liquid-sodium-cooled reactors that have been built have been shut down for long periods by sodium fires. Russia's BN-350 had a huge sodium fire.
The follow-on BN-600 reactor was designed with its steam generators in separate bunkers to contain sodium-water fires and with an extra steam generator so a fire-damaged steam generator can be repaired while the reactor continues to operate using the extra steam generator. Between 1980 and 1997, the BN-600 had 27 sodium leaks, 14 of which resulted in sodium fires …
• Leaks from pipes into the air have also resulted in serious fires. In 1995, Japan's prototype fast reactor, Monju, experienced a major sodium-air fire. Restart has been repeatedly delayed, and, as of the end of 2009, the reactor was still shut down.
• France's Rapsodie, Phenix and Superphenix breeder reactors and the UK's Dounreay Fast Reactor (DFR) and Prototype Fast Reactor (PFR) all suffered significant sodium leaks, some of which resulted in serious fires."
• Downtime makes the breeder reactor unreliable. "… a large fraction of sodium-cooled demonstration reactors have been shut down most of the time that they should have been generating electric power. A significant part of the problem has been the difficulty of maintaining and repairing the reactor hardware that is immersed in sodium. The requirement to keep air from coming into contact with sodium makes refueling and repairs inside the reactor vessel more complicated and lengthy than for water-cooled reactors. During repairs, the fuel has to be removed, the sodium drained and the entire system flushed carefully to remove residual sodium without causing an explosion. Such preparations can take months or years."
• Proliferation risks have not been addressed. "All reactors produce plutonium in their fuel but breeder reactors require plutonium recycle, the separation of plutonium from the ferociously radioactive fission products in the spent fuel. This makes the plutonium more accessible to would-be nuclear-weapon makers. Breeder reactors and separation of
plutonium from the spent fuel of ordinary reactors to provide startup fuel for breeder reactors therefore create proliferation problems. This fact became dramatically clear in 1974, when India used the first plutonium separated for its breeder reactor program to make a 'peaceful nuclear explosion.'
• Breeders themselves have also been used to produce plutonium for weapons. France used its Phenix breeder reactor to make weapon-grade plutonium in its blanket [of depleted uranium]. India, by refusing to place its breeder reactors under international safeguards as part of the U.S.-India nuclear deal, has raised concerns that it might do the same."
• Most breeder reactors are being shut down. "Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States have abandoned their breeder reactor development programs. Despite the arguments by France's nuclear conglomerate Areva, that fast-neutron reactors will ultimately fission all the plutonium building up in France's light-water reactor spent fuel,
France's only operating fast-neutron reactor, Phenix, was disconnected from the grid in March 2009 and scheduled for permanent shutdown by the end of that year.
• The Superphenix, the world's first commercial-sized breeder reactor, was abandoned in 1998 and is being decommissioned. There is no follow-on breeder reactor planned in France for at least a decade."
ABOUT THE IPFM
The International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM) was founded in January 2006. It is an independent group of arms-control and nonproliferation experts from 17 countries, including both nuclear weapon and non-nuclear weapon states.
The mission of the IPFM is to analyze the technical basis for practical and achievable policy initiatives to secure, consolidate, and reduce stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and plutonium. These fissile materials are the key ingredients in nuclear weapons, and their control is critical to nuclear disarmament, halting the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and ensuring that terrorists do not acquire nuclear weapons.
The IPFM is co-chaired by Professor R. Rajaraman of Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi and Professor Frank von Hippel of Princeton University. Its members include nuclear experts from Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Princeton University's Program on Science and Global Security provides administrative and research support for the IPFM. IPFM's initial support is provided by a five-year grant to Princeton University from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation of Chicago.
EDITOR'S NOTE: A streaming audio recording of IPFM's news event will be available on the Web as of 5 p.m. EST/2200 GMT on February 17, 2010 at http://www.fissilematerials.org.
SOURCE:
International Panel on Fissile Materials, Princeton, NJ
============================
7. Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
Background:
More evidence that the wheels are coming off the "nuclear renaissance" concept. When large reactors ran into financial roadblocks due to "sticker shock", many nuclear enthusiasts started touting small reactors as the answer, including the pebble bed reactor concept for Alberta's tar sands industry.
Think again, folks.
Gordon Edwards.
=================
Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C_PBM ... 02101.html
South Africa has stopped funding the development of the pebble bed modular reactor, leaving the project company looking at 75% cuts in staff.
World Nuclear News, 18 February 2010
A statement from the company said "directors are contemplating a large-scale restructuring" to "reduce costs and extend the operating life of the company."
"This will potentially involve a significant reduction of approximately 75% of the employee complement, which currently comprises more than 800 people."
PBMR Pty is owned by Eskom, the South African state's power company, which has long struggled to meet growing demand for power in the country. Plans made for a mass order of pressurized water reactors in early 2008 were put on hold, and then came the global recession. The Department of Public Enterprises that funds Eskom was not answering calls to confirm the details of its decision.
Reactor concept for sale
PBMR said the resources currently available would not sustain the current structure and the future depends on discussions with existing investors "to determine their conditions for further investments."
Reactor vendor, technology and fuel company Westinghouse has a minority stake in the demonstration plant PBMR had hoped to build, but this project effectively halted some months ago. There has also been cooperation for several years with Tsinghua University scientists working on a similar high-temperature reactor concept for China.
PBMR's most recent connection was with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, which signed a memorandum of understanding for collaboration in the development of the PBMR technology.
The PBMR design draws on long proven [hmm!] German technology and has been under development in South Africa since the early 1990s. It is a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTR) which uses fuel spheres of silicon carbide-coated uranium particles encased in graphite, with helium as the coolant. This gives the reactor a high degree of passive safety, exploiting inherent safety characteristics depending on the physical properties of the system without the need for intervention. The ability to produce hot steam at 750°C means the PBMR can supply process heat as well as generating electricity, and its small size makes it particularly suited to applications in areas lacking a fully developed transmission grid.
Much work took place on a 400 MWt (165 MWe) reactor using a full-scale Brayton cycle gas turbine, but in 2009 PBMR Pty decided to focus on a 200 MWt (80 MWe) design using a conventional Rankine cycle enabling it to produce steam and to generate electricity.
According to MHI executive vice-president and general manager of nuclear energy systems Akira Sawa, the possibility of going back to the original plan should not be dismissed. "The possibility that PBMR may in future still want to pursue the direct cycle, gas-turbine design, should not be ruled out," he said, noting the future potential uses stemming from the higher output temperatures achievable from such reactor systems.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
Compilation:
1. A Message from Angela Bischoff of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance
2. Four Pickering B Nuclear Reactors to be Closed Permanently in Ten Years Time
3. Radiation exposure results for workers at Ont. power plant may take months
4. Recommended Viewing: Kevin Kamps on Washington Review – Feb. 17.10
5. Obama Administration Announces Loan Guarantees to Construct New Nuclear Power Reactors in Georgia
6. Report: Unsuccessful 'Fast Breeder' Is No Solution for Long-Term Reactor Waste Disposal Issues
7. Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
==========================
1. A Message from Angela Bischoff of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance
As you may know the province of Ontario has asked the federal gov’t to subsidize the purchase of 2 new nuclear reactors to be built at Darlington.
We don’t think federal taxpayers in Halifax, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Parry Sound or Montreal should pay for our costly electrical supply.
And if the feds don’t subsidy the purchase, it’ll die on the drawing board!
Would you consider ordering free copies of this leaflet: http://ontariosgreenfuture.ca/CostlyNukes_12_09.pdf and distributing it to your friends around the country?
I’ll mail you multiple copies for FREE.
They contain postcards to Harper and Ignatieff saying essentially “don’t subsidize ON’s nukes”.
Thanks for your help getting these out across the country.
Send me your address and I’ll mail them out to you pronto.
Thanks…
Angela Bischoff
angela@cleanairalliance.org
===========================
2. Four Pickering B Nuclear Reactors to be Closed Permanently in Ten Years Time
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 9:10 PM
Background:
This is very big news. The eight reactors at Pickering have long been regarded as the heart of Ontario's nuclear power program.
Now OPG (Ontario Power Generation) has decided not to refurbish the four Pickering B reactors, choosing instead to shut the down permanently over the next decade.
The four Pickering A reactors were shut down in 1997 (along with three of the four Bruce A reactors) to allow time for the nuclear division of Ontario Hydro (as it was then called) to deal with thousands of unresolved safety-related maintenance problems that had accumulated.
Six years later, the decision was made to restart the four Pickering A reactors. The entire restart was to cost $800 million and take about six months. But after $1,200
million and 18 months of effort, only one of the four reactors (Unit 4) was successfully restarted.
After much angst, further delay, and another billion dollars, a second Pickering A unit was restarted (Unit 1).
At this point it was decided to mothball Units 2 and 3of Pickering A permanently. The two restarted reactors have been operating poorly, producing only about 60 percent of their rated electrical output.
Thus, after spending over two-and-a-half times as much money as projected for the entire Pickering A restart project, only 30% of its electrical output was restored.
Now, with the decision not to extend the operating lifetime of any of the Pickering B reactors, it appears that Pickering will have only two geriatric reactors operating in a ten year's time, and none at all after about 15 years (in 2025).
Gordon Edwards.
===============================
OPG Moves to Planning Phase of Darlington Refurbishment
Pickering B to Enter Final Decade of Operation with $300-Million Investment
Ontario Power Generation (OPG) Press Release, February 16 2010
http://www.opg.com/news/releases/
100211%20Nuclear%20Investment%20Strategy.asp
Durham Region – Today, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) announced a two-part investment strategy for its nuclear generating stations in Durham Region.
First, OPG will proceed with a detailed planning phase for the mid-life refurbishment of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station east of Toronto, with construction expected to start in about 2016. The business decision to move forward with an investment in Darlington comes after very positive outcomes of initial studies on the plant’s condition and continued strong operating performance. The next phase of the process will include an Environmental Assessment, an Integrated Safety Review and an Integrated Improvement Plan that will define the scope, cost and schedule of the refurbishment project.
OPG will also invest $300 million to ensure the continued safe and reliable performance of its Pickering B station for approximately 10 years. Following this, OPG will begin the longer term decommissioning process as refurbishment for Pickering B station will not be pursued.
The first step in this process is to layup the reactors and place them into safe storage. Pickering staff will have future opportunities placing the Pickering units in a safe storage state, at the Darlington refurbishment and operations, or at the potential new build at Darlington.
Extensive safety, environmental and equipment reliability studies conducted at the station concluded the Pickering plant can continue to operate safely and reliably to meet the province’s energy needs through to 2020. OPG has indicated to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that later this year it will file a Continued Operation Plan that takes Pickering B to its end of life.
“As Ontario’s generating company, OPG’s nuclear and hydro fleets are the backbone of the provincial electricity system,” said Brad Duguid, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure. “I support this business investment strategy as it aligns with the government’s vision for a clean energy future. It is also respectful of employees and it will ensure continued economic benefits to the people of Durham Region and Ontario.”
“OPG is committed to continued business investment in Durham Region to meet the electricity production needs of Ontarians,” said Tom Mitchell, OPG’s President and CEO. “Investing in refurbishment at Darlington and continuing operation at Pickering B provide the best value for the people of Ontario.”
“The key to a successful refurbishment is having a clear understanding of the scope and cost of the work we need to do well before we start construction,” said Bill Robinson, Executive Vice President Nuclear Projects.
In planning the Darlington refurbishment, OPG will build on the accomplishments and lessons learned during the Pickering A restart and the Pickering safe storage project. The restart of Pickering Unit 1 was completed on time and on budget, and the safe storage project for Units 2 and 3 is currently tracking on budget and on time for completion this
year. This phase of the Darlington refurbishment will also reflect the same thorough process undertaken for the Pickering B Environmental Assessment and Integrated Safety Review.
OPG continues to proceed with work that supports the construction and operation of a new nuclear station located at the Darlington site. The Environmental Assessment and site license work for a potential new build will continue in parallel with the above investment activities. -30-
For More Information, contact:
OPG Media Relations 416-592-4008 or 1-877-592-4008
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ontario Power Generation confirms Pickering nuclear station to close in 10 years
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1002 ... nt_nukes_1
The Canadian Press. Tue Feb 16 2010 Section: Quebec-Ontario Regional General News
Byline: BY KEITH LESLIE
TORONTO -- Ontario Power Generation announced Tuesday that it will spend $300 million to keep the Pickering nuclear station open for another decade before it's mothballed, and will spend an undisclosed amount to refurbish the Darlington nuclear station.
The Darlington refurbishment is good news in terms of jobs and in terms of Ontario's long-term electricity supply, said Energy Minister Brad Duguid, even though he could provide no details on the cost of the rebuild that is scheduled to start in 2016.
"There's still more work to be done to identify those numbers,'' Duguid told reporters.
"Our energy partners have looked at the various alternatives and their recommendations both in Pickering and Darlington is that this is the most cost-effective way to move forward to ensure that we produce this energy.''
The New Democrats said either the government and Ontario Power Generation were guessing at the estimated cost of the nuclear refurbishment, or were withholding the figures from the public.
"Absolutely people should know what the costs are and what the estimates are,'' said NDP energy critic Peter Tabuns. "You don't make a multibillion-dollar decision based on a guess.''
MORE: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1002 ... nt_nukes_1
======================
[b]3. Radiation exposure results for workers at Ont. power plant may take months
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Radiation+exposure+results+workers+power+plant+take+months/
2581916/story.html
By Linda Nguyen, Canwest News ServiceFebruary 18, 2010 1:55 PM
TORONTO — Nearly 200 workers at an Ontario nuclear power station will have to wait at least four months before they know if they were contaminated with radioactivity from an accidental release in November.
News of the wait time was revealed at public hearing Thursday in Ottawa between executives at Bruce Power, the country's only private nuclear station operator, and board members from the industry's watchdog, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
Initially, the company estimated 19 workers, who were directly working on a restart of the Bruce A Unit 1 reactor, were potentially affected by "low doses" of alpha radiation during the release on Nov. 26, 2009.
Alpha radiation contamination can cause sickness and lead to cancer risks if ingested or inhaled in large amounts.
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Radiation+exposure+results+workers+power+plant+take+months/
2581916/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Radiation release may have affected 217
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Radiation+release+have+affected/2574790/story.html
By Linda Nguyen, Canwest News Service February 17, 2010
At least 217 workers at the Bruce Power nuclear plant northwest of Toronto were potentially exposed to a release of radiation last November, possibly the largest radioactive contamination in Canada, according to the country's national nuclear watchdog.
The estimate was revealed in a regulatory filing Tuesday in Ottawa, ahead of a meeting scheduled later this week with board members from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Bruce Power, which is the country's only private nuclear station operator.
Initially, Bruce Power believed only 19 workers were potentially affected by the radioactive release, but that figure jumped to 190 late last week. It's now being put at 217 people by the commission.
And that number could still be expanded, said Bruce Power spokesperson Steve Cannon.
"We have people who are being tested and the figure could be more than that," he said. "We started with people who were most directly involved in the work to see if they showed any signs of exposure."
According to the report, the radioactive release was likely caused by "corrosion" in the Bruce A Unit 1 reactor at the station located on Lake Huron in Tiverton, Ont.
The alpha radiation was discovered during a restart of the reactor by work crews on Nov. 26. Alpha radiation contamination can cause sickness and lead to cancer risks if ingested or inhaled in large amounts. Tests on affected workers are currently underway.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Radiation+release+have+affected/2574790/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Nuclear watchdog investigates possible mass radiation exposure
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
As many as 217 workers involved in November incident at Ontario plant, according to filing from Nuclear Safety Commissiony has it taken so long for this information to become public?
Martin Mittelstaedt Environment Reporter
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail Published on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 1:11PM EST Last updated on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010 11:10PM EST
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission says as many as 217 workers may have been exposed to radioactivity at the Bruce nuclear power station on the shores of Lake Huron while refurbishing a reactor in late November.
It is believed to be one of the largest mass exposures to radiation at a Canadian nuclear site.
The station operator, Bruce Power, said a preliminary review of the radiation exposure indicates no one received an excessive dose. The company is taking the incident “very seriously,” said John Peevers, a Bruce spokesman, while cautioning that “all indications are that there is nothing there approaching the regulatory limit” for radiation.
The CNSC, Canada's nuclear safety watchdog, indicated the estimated number of people who may have been affected in a regulatory filing Tuesday in Ottawa. The incident will be discussed by its commissioners at a meeting Thursday and conditions around the reactor are being monitored by CNSC staff.
The CNSC said the workers were exposed to alpha contamination, a dangerous form of radiation that, if breathed in or ingested, poses a risk of cancer. Preliminary dose calculations indicated that an “action level for inhalation of airborne radioactivity may have been exceeded,” the CNSC said.
“Preliminary dose calculations were conservatively interpreted as a potential indication that an action level for inhalation of airborne radioactivity may have been exceeded,” the CNSC said.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/
nuclear-incident-exposes-217-workers-at-bruce-power/article1469970/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Admit nuclear risks, sociologist advises
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Admit+nuclear+risks+sociologist+advises/2465672/story.html
By Elise Stolte, Edmonton Journal January 20, 2010
EDMONTON — Nuclear experts trying to reassure the population that risks from nuclear power are minimal are missing the point, says a university social scientist.
As experts mount education campaigns, pull out charts and try to win on the strength of their data, people turn away, unable to believe they're getting a full answer, Debra Davidson, a sociologist in the department of rural economics at the University of Alberta, said Wednesday.
The only way government and industry leaders are going to win people back is by admitting the debate is not black and white, she said. "I know that's a fine political line to walk on."
Proponents worry if they come out and say "accidents are possible," they will create fear and no one will to accept their product.
"What I would say as a social scientist is exactly the opposite," said Davidson. "If you want to alleviate the concerns of members of the public then acknowledge the concerns. They're already scared. They're more likely to be afraid of people who say, that will never happen."
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/
Admit+nuclear+risks+sociologist+advises/2465672/story.html
=========================
4. Recommended Viewing: Kevin Kamps on Washington Review – Feb. 17.10
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/ ... E/A/29678/
Kevin+Kamps+Beyond+Nuclear+Alex+Flint+Nuclear+Energy+Inst.aspx
Kevin Kamps of "Beyond Nuclear" did a superb job of discussing nuclear issues on a live TV broadcast on C-Span Wednesday morning.
He was a guest on "Washington Review" along with Alex Flint of the Nuclear Energy Institute.
Scroll down to "recent interviews" and click on the hot-link that starts with Kevin Kamps' name under Wednesday, February 17.
http://www.c-span.org/Series/Washington-Journal.aspx
You can also catch Kevin on Al-Jazeera TV. Scroll down to the video with Obama's picture.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/
2010/02/2010216185539168789.html
~ ~ ~ ~
Open the link to an animated (but serious) political cartoon in the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/op ... 72010.html
============================
5. Obama Administration Announces Loan Guarantees to Construct New Nuclear Power Reactors in Georgia
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... r-reactors
US DOE Press Release, February 16 2010
Summary: President Obama today announced that the Department of Energy has offered conditional commitments for a total of $8.33 billion in loan guarantees for the construction and operation of two new nuclear reactors at a plant in Burke, Georgia. The project is scheduled to be the first U.S. nuclear power plant to break ground in nearly three decades.
The two new 1,100 megawatt Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactors at the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant will supplement the two existing reactor units at the facility. According to industry projections, the project will create approximately 3,500 onsite construction jobs. Once the nuclear reactors become operational, the project will create 800 permanent jobs.
Project sponsors include Georgia Power Company (GPC), Oglethorpe Power Corporation (OPC), the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG) and the City of Dalton, Georgia (Dalton).
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized DOE to issue loan guarantees for projects that avoid, reduce, or sequester air pollutants or anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and employ new or significantly-improved technologies as compared to technologies in service in the United States at the time the guarantee is issued. These are the first conditional commitments for loan guarantees to be offered by DOE for a nuclear power facility since enactment of the 2005 law. The Department's Loan Programs Office administers the loan guarantee program.
More Information:
* The full press release is at http://energy.gov/news/8643.htm
* A statement from President Obama on the guarantees is at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... m-maryland
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
A few things most people don’t know about Obama’s nuclear power
loan guarantee program [/b
]http://blogs.alternet.org/nirsnet/2010/02/17/
a-few-things-most-people-don%E2%80%99t-know-about-obama%E2%80%99s-nuclear-power-loan-guarantee-program/
President Obama Feb 16 announced an $8.3 billion loan guarantee to Southern Company to support construction of two new nuclear reactors in Georgia.
Here are a few things most people don’t know about this program, and that have not been widely reported in the media:
*Most people assume a loan guarantee is kind of like when your dad co-signed the loan for your first car. In fact, for nuclear reactors, taxpayers are not only guaranteeing the loans, they are providing the loans. Yep, that’s right, the money—which a Southern Company press release acknowledges—will come from the little-known Federal Financing Bank. We give the money to wealthy nuclear utilities, and then we promise that if they don’t pay it back, we will. Wow, great deal, especially with billions of dollars at stake.
*The Congressional Budget Office has predicted that 50%+ reactor projects receiving loan guarantees will default on their loans. That’s bad enough. It may be worse that Energy Secretary Steven Chu admitted upon announcing the first $8.3 billion loan guarantee Feb 16 that he did not know of this study—the only study ever conducted for Congress on the likelihood of utility default on nuclear loan guarantees.
MORE:
http://blogs.alternet.org/nirsnet/2010/02/17/
a-few-things-most-people-don%E2%80%99t-know-about-obama%E2%80%99s-nuclear-power-loan-guarantee-program/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
[b]Excuse Me, But That Nuclear Plant Has Its Hand On Your Wallet
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gsi ... y_id=57400
February 17, 2010
One way to think about an important choice you're about to make is to ask, "What's the worst thing that could happen?"
So let's say you're considering putting up a huge solar panel farm in the middle of Georgia. And I mean really huge, like $8 billion huge. The biggest solar farm ever built. Big. Got it? And what's the worst thing you could imagine that could happen? A cloudy day? Rust? A tornado? A plane crashes into it?
Wow. All those things would be pretty bad, no kidding. But for not very much money that gigantic solar farm would be repaired and it would go right back to making cheap power.
Now let's think about putting that same $8 billion into a subsidy for a new nuclear power plant in Georgia. Assuming the only steel mill in the world (in Japan) that can forge the containment vessel has the capacity, the reactor finally gets built and fired up. After a couple of years there are concrete vats of spent nuclear fuel sitting around near the plant, several trillion gallons of water have been used to cool the plant, killing all life in those trillion gallons, and there's a hot nuclear core in the reactor making steam and turning turbines.
Now ask yourself the question. What's the worst thing that could happen? Plane crash, deliberate or accidental? Earthquake? Design flaw? Construction flaw? Operator error? What's the potential damage in dollars? How about $600 billion, according to the Sandia National Laboratory and reported by PublicCitizen.
That $600 billion potential liability would require some pretty amazing insurance policy, don't you think? You might even guess that insurance costs explain why those nuclear plants are so expensive to build and maintain. But you'd be wrong. The nuclear industry is required to maintain a little cooperative that covers up to $10.5 billion of liability. That's it.
MORE: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gsi ... y_id=57400
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Five Reasons NOT to Invest in Nuclear Power
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/17-4
by Robert Alvarez
Published on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 by Huffington Post
Yesterday, President Obama announced that the Energy department will provide an $8.3 billion loan guarantee to the Southern Co. for its proposed nuclear power plant near Augusta, GA. "The loan guarantee program for new nuclear power plants not only will further the nation's commitment to clean energy, Obama said, "but also will assist in creating jobs in American communities." Unfortunately, nuclear energy isn't safe or clean and it's too costly for the nation.
News coverage has been mostly supportive and, in some cases, bordering on cheerleading. In his blog for the Atlantic magazine, Editor Daniel Indiviglio laid out [1] "five reasons to cheer Obama's ambition." Let's take a closer look at these "five reasons."
Reason #1: "Nuclear power is a known quantity. The U.S. has been successfully using this energy source for a very long time."
Nuclear power is certainly well known to Wall Street, which despite its recent debacles, has refused to fund power reactors for more than 30 years because of their financial risks. Reactor construction costs climbed as high as 380 percent above expectations during the boom period for nuclear in the 1970s. Nuclear investors eventually wrote off about $17 billion. Consider the 1979 Three Mile Island Accident, in which TMI investors lost about $2 billion in about an hour, when the reactor core started to melt. Nuclear energy has depended primarily on the financial burden being born by the tax payer and rate payer. This is hardly a success story.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/17-4
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Obama Breaks Campaign Promise; Gives $8 Billion to the Nuclear Industry
http://muracco.com/blog/?p=105
If you thought taxpayer-backed bailouts of Corporate America were over, guess again.
Yesterday President Obama broke a campaign promise and handed $8 billion to the nuclear industry in the form of a loan guarantee for dirty and dangerous nuclear reactors.
We need your help to push back.
As a presidential candidate, Obama said he would consider supporting new reactors only if we first solved the problems of security, waste, and proliferation. These problems have not been solved. New reactors remain a threat to public safety and the environment.
New reactors mean more radioactive waste piling up in populated areas around the country -- waste that will be dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years. That's one reason the FBI has called nuclear facilities "target rich" environments for terrorists.
And the nuclear industry's safety problems are myriad. Just last month, dangerously high levels of radioactive tritium -- a cancer-causing carcinogen -- were found leaking from pipes at a reactor in Vermont and polluting groundwater near the Connecticut River. Worse, there is still no guarantee we can avoid a Three Mile Island-type incident or a full-scale Chernobyl-like disaster.
But safety isn't the only problem. After more than 50 years of depending on federal subsidies for its survival, the nuclear industry still can't stand on its own. Even Wall Street bankers have concluded that new reactors are too risky to invest in, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the risk of default on new nuclear loans is "well above fifty percent." So why is President Obama asking taxpayers to foot the bill?
Taxpayers have bailed out enough failing industries; we don't need to add dirty and dangerous nuclear to the list. Will you help us to stop this nuclear industry bailout by supporting Friends of the Earth with a contribution of $25 or more today?
With safer, more reliable alternatives available, including wind and solar power and greater energy efficiency, there's no reason to blow our tax dollars on dangerous new reactors. We need investments in truly green energy, not false solutions.
Friends of the Earth is helping to lead this fight, both on the ground and on the air. Last year, Senator Bob Bennett credited our TV ads with knocking an up-to-$50-billion bailout of the nuclear industry out of the federal stimulus package. And in just the last few days, we've carried the argument against a nuclear bailout through outlets including Time Magazine, USA Today, The Associated Press, CNN and the NBC Nightly News.
For more than a year, Friends of the Earth's Tom Clements, an experienced anti-nuclear advocate, has been waging a multifaceted campaign on the ground in South Carolina to stop four proposed reactors from being built there. Tom is organizing grassroots activists, formally intervening in the regulatory process, and bringing a potentially precedent-setting lawsuit to the state Supreme Court this spring.
We need your financial support to keep this fight going. Please make a contribution today.
Thank you,
Erich Pica
President, Friends of the Earth
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Obama's Nuclear Boondoggle
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010 ... es-nuclear
— By Kate Sheppard, Mother Jones, Wed Feb. 17, 2010
In its eagerness to woo Republicans with nuclear-friendly policies, the Obama administration plans to hand out $54.5 billion in government-backed loans to kick-start a nuclear renaissance. On Tuesday, it announced the first beneficiary of this largesse—and apparently the best candidate it could find was a proposed plant that's been put on hold by federal regulators due to serious safety concerns.
The Department of Energy (DOE) will underwrite a loan of $8.3 billion to Southern Company's two planned reactors at Plant Vogtle in Burke County, Georgia—"just the first of what we hope will be many new nuclear projects," Carol Browner, the White House adviser on climate and energy, told reporters on Tuesday. Browner said the loan
guarantee demonstrates the administration's commitment to working with Republicans on energy; handing major concessions to nuclear interests has been a key part of the Obama administration's strategy to pass a climate bill this year.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Obama's Atomic Blunder
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/17-5
Published on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
by Harvey Wasserman
As Vermont seethes with radioactive contamination and the Democratic Party crumbles, Barack Obama has plunged into the atomic abyss.
In the face of fierce green opposition and withering scorn from both liberal and conservative budget hawks, Obama has done what George W. Bush could not---pledge billions of taxpayer dollars for a relapse of the 20th Century's most expensive technological failure.
Obama has announced some $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for two new reactors planned for Georgia. Their Westinghouse AP-1000 designs have been rejected by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as being unable to withstand natural cataclysms like hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes.
The Vogtle site was to originally host four reactors at a total cost of $600 million; it wound up with two at $9 billion.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/17-5
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
WATCH: “A Bad Day for America”: Anti-Nuclear Activist Harvey Wasserman Criticizes Obama Plan to Fund Nuclear Reactors
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/18/nukes
February 18, 2010
President Obama has pledged $8.3 billion in loan guarantees needed to build the first nuclear reactors in nearly three decades. The move, along with a tripling of nuclear loan guarantees in the President’s budget, represents a new federal commitment to the nuclear power sector. We speak to independent journalist and longtime anti-nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman, who helped found the grassroots movement against nuclear power in the United States in the 1970s. [includes rush transcript]
Guest:
Harvey Wasserman, independent journalist and longtime anti-nuclear activist. In the early 1970s, he helped found the grassroots movement against nuclear power in the United States. He is the editor of nukefree.org and is a senior adviser to Greenpeace USA.
Related Links Nuke Free.org
MORE: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/18/nukes
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
“Nuclear Power Plant Loan Guarantees: An Unacceptable Risk,” by Mary Byrd Davis http://www.earthisland.org/ecoperspecti ... -16-10.pdf
Last year 9,992 MW of wind power was installed in the United States. That is the equivalent of more than eight nuclear reactors of the type being built at Vogtle 3 and 4, which just received a federal loan guarantee from the Department of Energy. The award is ironic, since the cost of Vogtle 1 and 2 helped to bring an end to the expansion of nuclear power in the 1970s and 1980s when the estimated cost of $660 million for four reactors ballooned to an expenditure of $8.7 billion for two.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
HELP STOP TRIPLING OF NUCLEAR LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM!
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org
HELP STOP TRIPLING OF NUCLEAR LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM!
WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TODAY AND JOIN IN ON NATIONAL CALL-CONGRESS DAY WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24!
February 18, 2010
Dear Friends,
By now you probably know that on Tuesday President Obama personally announced conditional approval of an $8.3 billion loan guarantee for the construction of two new reactors at the Vogtle site in Georgia.
And you also probably know that Obama has proposed tripling the loan guarantee program for new reactors in his FY 2011 budget, to $54 billion.
What you may not know about the Vogtle deal is that we taxpayers are not just providing loan guarantees, we're providing the actual loans, through the Federal Financing Bank. And you also may not know that the Southern Company has not yet accepted the conditions of the loan--and for various reasons, it may not. In other words, it's not a done deal.
And neither is a $54 billion loan guarantee program a done deal. Congress has to approve this proposal. Twice last year, with your help, we beat back efforts to increase the loan guarantee program. We can do it again!
*The first step is to send a letter to your Representative now.
*The second step is to spread the word and encourage as many people as possible to send in letters. We need to speak very LOUDLY on this one!
*The third step is to get ready for National Call-Congress Day on Wednesday, February 24. We've done this before and thousands of you have called. This time it will be even bigger, because this is a coordinated effort with many groups: NIRS, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Beyond Nuclear, Friends of the Earth, and you!
So prepare yourself (and we'll send some new talking points early next week), activate your e-mail lists and phone trees, tell your friends and family members. Let's keep the phones ringing in both the House and Senate all day long next Wednesday.
Reaction to the Vogtle loan guarantee, and to the proposed tripling of the program, already has been strong. You can see NIRS' press releases, and statements by Ralph Nader, Sierra Club, PSR, etc. on the front page of our website: www.nirs.org.
Here is a link to a story in today's New York Times titled Environmental Advocates Are Cooling on Obama. Here is a link to a story on the Facing South site. And here is a very good piece from Time Magazine. These are typical of the kinds of stories we've been seeing.
Now we need to follow up the strong reaction to Obama's nuclear plans with strong action:
Please write your representatives here.
Plan to be part of National Call-Congress Day Wednesday, February 24.
And if there is anything we can do to help you, let us know.
Thanks for all you do,
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
====================
6. Report: Unsuccessful 'Fast Breeder' Is No Solution for Long-Term Reactor Waste Disposal Issues
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/
report--unsuccessful-fast-breeder-is-no-solution-for-long-term-reactor-waste-disposal-issues-84610032.html
After Over $50 Billion Spent by U.S., Japan, Russia, UK, India and France, No Commercial Model Found High Cost, Unreliability, Major Safety Problems and Proliferation Risks All Seen as Major Barriers to Use
PRINCETON, N.J., Feb. 17 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/
Hopes that the "fast breeder"– a plutonium-fueled nuclear reactor designed to produce more fuel than it consumed -- might serve as a major part of the long-term nuclear waste disposal solution are not merited by the dismal track record to date of such sodium-cooled reactors in France, India, Japan, the Soviet Union/Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, according to a major new study from the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM).
For the full text of the IPFM study, go to http://www.fissilematerials.org
Titled "Fast Breeder Reactor Programs: History and Status," the PFM report concludes: "The problems [with fast breeder reactors] … make it hard to dispute Admiral Hyman Rickover's summation in 1956, based on his experience with a sodium-cooled reactor
developed to power an early U.S. nuclear submarine, that such reactors are 'expensive to build, complex to operate, susceptible to prolonged shutdown as a result of even minor malfunctions, and difficult and time-consuming to repair.'"
Plagued by high costs, often multi-year downtime for repairs (including a 15-year reactor restart delay in Japan), multiple safety problems (among them often catastrophic sodium fires triggered simply by contact with oxygen), and unresolved proliferation risks, "fast breeder" reactors already have been the focus of more than $50 billion in development spending, including more than $10 billion each by the U.S., Japan and Russia. As the IPFM report notes: "Yet none of these efforts has produced a reactor that is anywhere near economically competitive with light-water reactors … After six decades and the expenditure of the equivalent of tens of billions of dollars, the promise of breeder
reactors remains largely unfulfilled and efforts to commercialize them have been steadily cut back in most countries."
MORE:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/
report--unsuccessful-fast-breeder-is-no-solution-for-long-term-reactor-waste-disposal-issues-84610032.html
OTHER KEY FINDINGS
The IPFM report also found:
• The rationale for breeder reactors is no longer sound. "The rationale for pursuing breeder reactors sometimes explicit and sometimes implicit was based on the following key assumptions:
1. Uranium is scarce and high-grade deposits would quickly become depleted if fission power were deployed on a large scale;
2. Breeder reactors would quickly become economically competitive with the light-water reactors that dominate nuclear power today;
3. Breeder reactors could be as safe and reliable as light-water reactors; and,
4. The proliferation risks posed by breeders and their 'closed' fuel cycle, in which plutonium would be recycled, could be managed.
Each of these assumptions has proven to be wrong."
• Significant safety issues are unresolved. "Sodium's major disadvantage is that it reacts violently with water and burns if exposed to air. The steam generators, in which molten sodium and high-pressure water are separated by thin metal, have proved to be one of the most troublesome features of breeder reactors. Any leak results in a reaction that can rupture the tubes and lead to a major sodium-water fire.….
• A large fraction of the liquid-sodium-cooled reactors that have been built have been shut down for long periods by sodium fires. Russia's BN-350 had a huge sodium fire.
The follow-on BN-600 reactor was designed with its steam generators in separate bunkers to contain sodium-water fires and with an extra steam generator so a fire-damaged steam generator can be repaired while the reactor continues to operate using the extra steam generator. Between 1980 and 1997, the BN-600 had 27 sodium leaks, 14 of which resulted in sodium fires …
• Leaks from pipes into the air have also resulted in serious fires. In 1995, Japan's prototype fast reactor, Monju, experienced a major sodium-air fire. Restart has been repeatedly delayed, and, as of the end of 2009, the reactor was still shut down.
• France's Rapsodie, Phenix and Superphenix breeder reactors and the UK's Dounreay Fast Reactor (DFR) and Prototype Fast Reactor (PFR) all suffered significant sodium leaks, some of which resulted in serious fires."
• Downtime makes the breeder reactor unreliable. "… a large fraction of sodium-cooled demonstration reactors have been shut down most of the time that they should have been generating electric power. A significant part of the problem has been the difficulty of maintaining and repairing the reactor hardware that is immersed in sodium. The requirement to keep air from coming into contact with sodium makes refueling and repairs inside the reactor vessel more complicated and lengthy than for water-cooled reactors. During repairs, the fuel has to be removed, the sodium drained and the entire system flushed carefully to remove residual sodium without causing an explosion. Such preparations can take months or years."
• Proliferation risks have not been addressed. "All reactors produce plutonium in their fuel but breeder reactors require plutonium recycle, the separation of plutonium from the ferociously radioactive fission products in the spent fuel. This makes the plutonium more accessible to would-be nuclear-weapon makers. Breeder reactors and separation of
plutonium from the spent fuel of ordinary reactors to provide startup fuel for breeder reactors therefore create proliferation problems. This fact became dramatically clear in 1974, when India used the first plutonium separated for its breeder reactor program to make a 'peaceful nuclear explosion.'
• Breeders themselves have also been used to produce plutonium for weapons. France used its Phenix breeder reactor to make weapon-grade plutonium in its blanket [of depleted uranium]. India, by refusing to place its breeder reactors under international safeguards as part of the U.S.-India nuclear deal, has raised concerns that it might do the same."
• Most breeder reactors are being shut down. "Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States have abandoned their breeder reactor development programs. Despite the arguments by France's nuclear conglomerate Areva, that fast-neutron reactors will ultimately fission all the plutonium building up in France's light-water reactor spent fuel,
France's only operating fast-neutron reactor, Phenix, was disconnected from the grid in March 2009 and scheduled for permanent shutdown by the end of that year.
• The Superphenix, the world's first commercial-sized breeder reactor, was abandoned in 1998 and is being decommissioned. There is no follow-on breeder reactor planned in France for at least a decade."
ABOUT THE IPFM
The International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM) was founded in January 2006. It is an independent group of arms-control and nonproliferation experts from 17 countries, including both nuclear weapon and non-nuclear weapon states.
The mission of the IPFM is to analyze the technical basis for practical and achievable policy initiatives to secure, consolidate, and reduce stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and plutonium. These fissile materials are the key ingredients in nuclear weapons, and their control is critical to nuclear disarmament, halting the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and ensuring that terrorists do not acquire nuclear weapons.
The IPFM is co-chaired by Professor R. Rajaraman of Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi and Professor Frank von Hippel of Princeton University. Its members include nuclear experts from Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Princeton University's Program on Science and Global Security provides administrative and research support for the IPFM. IPFM's initial support is provided by a five-year grant to Princeton University from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation of Chicago.
EDITOR'S NOTE: A streaming audio recording of IPFM's news event will be available on the Web as of 5 p.m. EST/2200 GMT on February 17, 2010 at http://www.fissilematerials.org.
SOURCE:
International Panel on Fissile Materials, Princeton, NJ
============================
7. Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
Background:
More evidence that the wheels are coming off the "nuclear renaissance" concept. When large reactors ran into financial roadblocks due to "sticker shock", many nuclear enthusiasts started touting small reactors as the answer, including the pebble bed reactor concept for Alberta's tar sands industry.
Think again, folks.
Gordon Edwards.
=================
Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C_PBM ... 02101.html
South Africa has stopped funding the development of the pebble bed modular reactor, leaving the project company looking at 75% cuts in staff.
World Nuclear News, 18 February 2010
A statement from the company said "directors are contemplating a large-scale restructuring" to "reduce costs and extend the operating life of the company."
"This will potentially involve a significant reduction of approximately 75% of the employee complement, which currently comprises more than 800 people."
PBMR Pty is owned by Eskom, the South African state's power company, which has long struggled to meet growing demand for power in the country. Plans made for a mass order of pressurized water reactors in early 2008 were put on hold, and then came the global recession. The Department of Public Enterprises that funds Eskom was not answering calls to confirm the details of its decision.
Reactor concept for sale
PBMR said the resources currently available would not sustain the current structure and the future depends on discussions with existing investors "to determine their conditions for further investments."
Reactor vendor, technology and fuel company Westinghouse has a minority stake in the demonstration plant PBMR had hoped to build, but this project effectively halted some months ago. There has also been cooperation for several years with Tsinghua University scientists working on a similar high-temperature reactor concept for China.
PBMR's most recent connection was with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, which signed a memorandum of understanding for collaboration in the development of the PBMR technology.
The PBMR design draws on long proven [hmm!] German technology and has been under development in South Africa since the early 1990s. It is a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTR) which uses fuel spheres of silicon carbide-coated uranium particles encased in graphite, with helium as the coolant. This gives the reactor a high degree of passive safety, exploiting inherent safety characteristics depending on the physical properties of the system without the need for intervention. The ability to produce hot steam at 750°C means the PBMR can supply process heat as well as generating electricity, and its small size makes it particularly suited to applications in areas lacking a fully developed transmission grid.
Much work took place on a 400 MWt (165 MWe) reactor using a full-scale Brayton cycle gas turbine, but in 2009 PBMR Pty decided to focus on a 200 MWt (80 MWe) design using a conventional Rankine cycle enabling it to produce steam and to generate electricity.
According to MHI executive vice-president and general manager of nuclear energy systems Akira Sawa, the possibility of going back to the original plan should not be dismissed. "The possibility that PBMR may in future still want to pursue the direct cycle, gas-turbine design, should not be ruled out," he said, noting the future potential uses stemming from the higher output temperatures achievable from such reactor systems.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 20.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:28 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 20.10
Compilation:
1. Critics say Province is 'guessing' on Darlington price tag
2. “Buy American” deal will hit PEI hard, says Council of Canadians
3. Five NATO countries want US nukes out of Europe
4. Faith in fission
5. Weekly Mulch: Nuclear Plants Will Go Up in Georgia
6. President Obama's Nuclear Reversal
7. Government Study: Elevated Uranium Levels in Grand Canyon's Watershed
8. Time Magazine: Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
9. France exposed troops to radiation
10. Nothing 'free' about trade with U.S.
11. Remodelling the world challenge of this century
12. Saskatchewan Environmental Society – Upcoming Events – Feb. 17.10
13. Saskatchewan Eco-Network (SEN) Info Bulletin
14. WATCH: Report: Largest Corporations Responsible for $2.2T in Environmental Damage
===========================
1. Critics say Province is 'guessing' on Darlington price tag
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/durham/
article/148621
Durham Business Times, Thu Feb 18 2010, Page 01
By Jennifer Stone, jstone@durhamregion.com
CLARINGTON -- Rough, very preliminary estimates indicate refurbishment of Darlington's four nuclear reactors, to extend their generation capability
to about 2050, will cost $6 billion to $10 billion, says Infrastructure and Energy Minister Brad Duguid.
Ontario Power Generation announced a reinvestment plan Tuesday which would see a $300 million upgrade to allow Pickering to run for approximately another decade, as well as the intention to refurbish the four reactors at Darlington, to extend their lifetime to about 2050.
The plan was met with immediate criticism at Queen's Park, as New Democrats questioned how the government could be sure the plan is the most cost-effective way to ensure Ontario's power supply.
Mr. Duguid "said the refurbishment is cost-effective, but refused to tell Ontarians how much the rebuild will cost," said Peter Tabuns, the NDP's Toronto Danforth MPP, according to Wednesday's Instant Hansard, a record of proceedings of the provincial legislature. "Why won't the minister share the expected cost of the refurbishment of the Darlington plant and the alternatives that were considered so that Ontarians can be sure that this decision is not yet another example of the McGuinty government's blind faith in costly and risky nuclear plants?"
OPG officials say firm costs can't be known until preliminary studies, set to be carried out over the next four years, determine the scope of work to be completed during the refurbishment.
But, given what's known so far, a "very preliminary" estimate puts the refurbishment work in the $6 billion to $10 billion range, Mr. Duguid said in an interview.
MORE: http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/durham/
article/148621
======================
2. “Buy American” deal will hit PEI hard, says Council of Canadians
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:00 AM
The Guardian reports that, "The Council of Canadians is raising questions about the Buy American trade deal announced by the Stephen Harper government."
Leo Broderick of Charlottetown, vice-chair of the Council of Canadians, says, “Canada is giving away far more than it can receive in this deal. And to make matters much worse, the provinces have been included in the World Trade Organization’s government procurement agreement. It’s a disaster for local governments and an attack on democracy. This means here on Prince Edward Island, the P.E.I. government has given up its right to give preferential treatment to contracting policies that favour local businesses. It has also given up the right to give preference to Canadian suppliers, buy-local food policies and centralized purchasing of school materials and pharmaceuticals for example. At the same time the Buy American policies in the U.S.A. remain intact. The local Council of Canadians is asking why Premier Robert Ghiz agreed to this deal. And what did the Harper give P.E.I. in return?”
The full article can be read at http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/
index.cfm?sid=328461&sc=98.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
===========================
3. Five NATO countries want US nukes out of Europe
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=4132
February 20, 2010
Five NATO countries plan to call for the removal of all U.S. tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, reports Agence France Presse (Pascal Mallet, “Allied bid for Obama to remove US European nuclear stockpile,” AFP, 19 February 2010).
The five–Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Norway–include three of the four or five European NATO members that still participate in the controversial NATO “nuclear-sharing” program, under which U.S. nuclear weapons are stored on Allied airbases and Allied pilots are trained to deliver the weapons in the event of a NATO decision to use them. Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Italy each maintain one fighter-bomber squadron equipped with U.S. B-61 nuclear bombs. Turkey also may still be participating in the program, but this has not been confirmed. In addition to the nuclear-sharing program, the U.S. stockpiles B-61 bombs in Italy and Turkey for the use of U.S. forces. In total, about 150-200 U.S. bombs are thought to be based in Europe.
The bid to remove the weapons comes as NATO is considering how to update its “Strategic Concept” document, which (among other elements) spells out the role of nuclear weapons in NATO strategy. The last update of the Strategic Concept took place in 1999. The Canadian government tried to encourage NATO to reduce its reliance on nuclear weapons during the run-up to that review. But there was little buy-in from the other NATO allies at that time.
About the best we can hope for this time around is that Canada won’t try to stand in the way of a saner approach to NATO nuclear policy.
Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, NATO, NATO Strategic Concept, Netherlands, Norway, Nuclear weapons
========================
4. Faith in fission
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/
archive/2010/02/19/lawrence-solomon-faith-in-fission.aspx
Environmentalism is the religion of the left, but many on the right blindly follow a misguided dogma of their own
Lawrence Solomon National Post 19 February 2010
Environmentalism is the religion of the left, commentators often pronounce: “The Church of the Environment,” as conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer puts it.
I have no argument with them here. Many environmentalists have taken leave of their senses, making a ritual of recycling and a demon of carbon dioxide, a colourless, odourless and tasteless gas that is indispensable to all life on Earth. By conducting mystical inquisitions into our imagined carbon footprints instead of focusing on core issues such as protecting our air and water, environmentalists hurt their cause.
But those on the right, particularly in the U.S., have their own dogma, one that is equally irrational and that also hurts their cause. The religion of the right is Nuclear Power.
“Go nuclear,” urges Charles Krauthammer. “The nation should generate much more than the one-fifth of its electricity nuclear power currently produces”, urges conservative columnist George Will. Build 50 more nuclear plants, urges William Kristol of The Weekly Standard. “Senate Republicans support building 100 new plants as quickly as possible,” maintains Mitch
McConnell, the Republican Senate Minority Leader.
All these defenders of the right preach the virtues of competition and free markets, of fiscal restraint, of small government, of innovations born of the entrepreneurial spirit. All preach the fallacy of thinking the government should be in the business of picking winners. Yet such is their faith that none are troubled by nuclear power’s role as the antithesis of everything their secular selves believe.
Not one nuclear plant, anywhere in the world, has ever been built without government subsidies of some kind. The only country that has enthusiastically embraced nuclear power — France, which obtains close to 80% of its electricity from its state-owned reactors — drove its power sector to financial ruin: “Catastrophic,” in the frank words of the president of Electricite de France, the state-owned power company. The only privately owned nuclear generating company that operated in a competitive environment — British Energy, which inherited the best reactors in the U.K. fleet after the U.K.’s state-owned monopoly was broken up and privatized — soon went bankrupt and was taken back by the U.K. government at taxpayer expense.
Commercial nuclear power is the most heavily subsidized industry in the history of the world and the single biggest money-loser in the history of business.
MORE:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/
archive/2010/02/19/lawrence-solomon-faith-in-fission.aspx
============================
5. Weekly Mulch: Nuclear Plants Will Go Up in Georgia
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/30560
Feb. 19.10
If you were to look out to the horizon of the clean energy field right now, you would see the hazy outlines of nuclear reactors. President Barack Obama announced this week that two new nuclear plants will go up in Georgia, built on the promise that the federal government will guarantee $8.3 billion in loans—nearly the entire estimated cost of the project.
“It is a slap in the face to environmentalists,” says Matthew Rothschild at The Progressive. “Though these will be the first nuclear reactors constructed in more than three decades, Obama still labeled them, somehow, as part of the “technologies of tomorrow.””
The president’s announcement wasn’t the only environmental downer this week. Expectations for the next international climate negotiations, to be held in Mexico at the end of 2010, are already low, and yesterday Yvo de Boer, the United Nations’ top climate negotiator, said he would step down this summer and join the private sector. To top it all off, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) now faces sixteen lawsuits that would block its ability to decrease carbon emissions, including one backed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R).
A nuclear error
Although the Georgia reactors would be the first new nuclear construction in the country in decades, they mark the beginning of what the Obama administration hopes will be a shift towards nuclear energy. In the 2011 budget, President Obama proposed an expansion of the loan guarantee program that funds projects like these from $18.5 billion to $54.5 billion.
These nuclear projects deserve close scrutiny. At AlterNet, Harvey Wasserman details the problems with the Georgia reactors. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) already rejected the initial designs for the plant. That means the estimated cost could well exceed the projected $8.5 billion, which Wasserman says, was low at the start.
“Over the past several years the estimated price tag for proposed new reactors has jumped from $2-3 billion each, in some cases to more than $12 billion today,” he explains.
Risky business
In the past, energy firms like The Southern Company, the Atlanta-based group that is building the plants, could only imagine securing funding for new nuclear projects. These projects have a high risk of failure, and private investors do not dream of touching them.
Inter Press Service’s Julio Godoy reviewed several European studies on the feasibility of financing nuclear plants. One study from Citibank concluded that “the risks faced by developers … are so large and variable that individually they could each bring even the largest utility company to its knees financially,” Godoy reports. These risks include uncontrollable construction costs, long delays, and the possibility of low power prices that would not support that plants’ operation.
That’s one reason that green advocates disapprove of nuclear energy: The money could be better spent elsewhere. “People tend to think that environmentalists have some sort of allergic reaction to nuclear because they’re scared of radioactive waste and unsecured nuclear materials,” writes Aaron Wiener at The Washington Independent. “But when it comes down to it…It’s simply a bad investment to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into a nuclear sinkhole when proven technologies such as wind and solar would provide guaranteed benefits.”
Wind to fly on
While the administration lavishes attention on nuclear, other clean energy industries are trying to move forward. In Wisconsin, a Spanish company is opening up a plant to build wind turbine components, which will bring much-needed jobs to the Milwaukee area, as Kari Lydersen reports for Working In These Times.
There’s always the threat, however, that gains like this will be rolled back by competition from China. Clean energy jobs can still be sent overseas, Lydersen points out. She argues that the United State could be providing a boost to the solar and wind industry in order to keep jobs here.
“Manufacturing in the United States could be driven both with incentives to the actual producers – like the tax break to Ingeteam [the Spanish company building the Wisconsin plant] and support for renewable energy through renewable energy portfolio (RPS) standards and other incentives,” she writes.
China as competition
From a purely environmental perspective, China’s headway into green technology is not a problem. Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum reminds us that the whole world can benefit from advances in clean energy, wherever they happen. Climate change is, after all, a global crisis. But Drum concedes that fear of Chinese competition does serve some purpose:
“I’ve lately become more receptive to the idea that, for better or worse, the only way to get Americans to take this stuff seriously is to kick it old school and start hauling out that old time Cold War evangelism,” he says. “Frame green tech as a matter of vital economic and national security superiority over the Reds and quit worrying overmuch about whether that’s really technically accurate. Just figure that it’s close enough, it’s language everyone understands, and it’ll do a better job of motivating development than a couple hundred more PowerPoints about receding glaciers.”
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Pulse, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
========================
6. President Obama's Nuclear Reversal
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/19-11
by Erich Pica
Published on Friday, February 19, 2010 by The Huffington Post
President Obama announced Tuesday [1] that the Department of Energy is awarding $8 billion in taxpayer dollars towards loan guarantees [2] to build the United States' first nuclear reactors in nearly thirty years. This move may be politically expedient, but for the public, it's a raw deal.
As a candidate, Obama expressed openness to new reactors, but said [3], "Before an expansion... is considered, key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation."
President Obama should heed candidate Obama's advice [4]. These issues have not been addressed. If anything, the challenges facing the nuclear industry have grown worse.
With Yucca Mountain a no-go [5], there is still nowhere to put the radioactive waste piling up across the country. New reactors would only add to the waste problem and could increase pressure to reprocess spent fuel, a dangerous and costly scheme that would increase waste streams.
There's also still no way to ensure reactors' safety. Reports [6] of Homer Simpson-like lapses [7] by staff at reactor sites abound, and the FBI has called nuclear facilities "target rich" [8] environments for terrorists. More reactors also mean more weapons-usable material, increasing the risk of proliferation.
The fiscal implications of President Obama's position are alarming. For decades, the industry has depended on taxpayer support. Investing in emerging technologies that can eventually thrive on their own makes sense, but the nuclear industry doesn't fit the bill. After more than 50 years as one of the biggest recipients of federal subsidies, the industry should sink or swim on its own.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/19-11
===========================
7. Government Study: Elevated Uranium Levels in Grand Canyon's Watershed - Exploration and Mining Sites Consistently Exceed Background Levels
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/19-1
CONTACT: Conservation Groups
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club, (602) 999-5790
Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Trust, (928) 774-7466
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 19, 2010 1:35 PM
GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK - February 19 - A series of studies [1] released today by the United States Geological Survey show elevated uranium levels in wells, springs, and soil in and around uranium exploration and mining sites within the watershed feeding Grand Canyon National Park and the Colorado River. The agency conducted the monitoring to provide information for an environmental impact statement that is analyzing a proposed 20-year mineral withdrawal that would protect nearly 1 million acres of public land surrounding Grand Canyon National Park from future mining activities.
"These reports demonstrate unequivocally that uranium mining should not proceed in these environmentally sensitive lands," said Stacey Hamburg of the Sierra Club's Grand Canyon Chapter. "Contaminated lands and waters around the Grand Canyon are not what we want for the future of northern Arizona. Cleaning up contaminated sites should be the government's first priority."
Elevated uranium levels consistently exceed natural background levels in and around exploration and old mining sites - sometimes, as in the case of the Kanab North mine, by as much as 10 times. Elevated uranium levels were also detected near the old "Hack" uranium-mine complex, which the Bureau of Land Management actively promotes on its Web site [2] as a model of good mine reclamation (see video here [3]). Reclaimed in the 1980s, the mines are located in Hack Canyon, a tributary to Kanab Creek and the Grand Canyon and Colorado River.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/19-1
============================
8. Time Magazine: Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 46,00.html
Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
By MICHAEL GRUNWALD, Time Magazine, Thursday, Feb. 18, 2010
If you want to understand why the U.S. hasn't built a nuclear reactor in three decades, the Vogtle power plant outside Atlanta is an excellent reminder of the insanity of nuclear economics. The plant's original cost estimate was less than $1 billion for four reactors. Its eventual price tag in 1989 was nearly $9 billion, for only two reactors. But now there's widespread chatter about a nuclear renaissance, so the Southern Co. is finally trying to build the other two reactors at Vogtle. The estimated cost: $14 billion. And you can be sure that number is way too low, because nuclear cost estimates are always way too low.
That's why no Wall Street moneyman in his right mind would finance a new reactor. But President Obama has located an alternative financier: you. On Tuesday he announced an $8.33 billion loan guarantee for the new Vogtle reactors, the first step in the Administration's push to jump-start the nuclear construction industry. Obama also urged Congress to set aside political differences and triple the budget for nuclear loan guarantees. "On an issue that affects our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, we can't keep on being mired in the same old stale debates between the left and the right, between environmentalists and entrepreneurs," Obama said.
But the President is ignoring a much fresher debate: between theory and reality. Even if Obama were correct that a nuclear rebirth is needed to address the climate crisis — and he isn't correct — the fact is that the rebirth isn't happening. Despite the prospect of new taxpayer guarantees — and the cradle-to-grave subsidies that already support this 50-year-old industry at the federal and state level — utilities keep scrapping or delaying plans for new reactors.
MORE:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 46,00.html
==========================
9. France exposed troops to radiation
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Franc ... radiation/
2575119/story.html
The Telegraph February 17, 2010
France used its infantry as "guinea pigs" in open-air nuclear tests in the 1960s, ordering them in one instance to carry out war games within 640 metres of a blast epicentre, previously unseen records have shown.
The 260-page report was compiled in 1998 and details military exercises conducted after four atmospheric tests in the Algerian desert in 1961, and 13 underground tests up until 1966.
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Franc ... radiation/
2575119/story.html
===============================
10. Nothing 'free' about trade with U.S.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/
nothing-free-about-trade-with-us-84557142.html
By: Frances Russell 17/02/2010 1:00 AM | Winnipeg Free Press·
Canadians will import another big dose of American social and economic inequality with yet another bad trade deal made in our endless -- and endlessly futile -- pursuit of the Holy Grail of "guaranteed access" to the U.S. market.
Canada's so-called "exemption" from the about-to-expire Buy America stimulus package will be minimal and, as usual, subject to cancellation at American whim.
Also as usual, Boy Scout Canada has put almost all it has to give on the American table. U.S. business will gain nearly unfettered access to the multibillion-dollar public purchasing of all provinces, territories, cities with more than 50,000 inhabitants and public entities including Crown corporations, universities, school boards and health-care institutions.
And what do Canadians get? Liberal international trade critic Scott Brison says more than 75 per cent of the U.S. stimulus package has already been spent "so the best we can get is just the crumbs."
"Canada didn't obtain any guarantees on future American spending programs... Only 37 of the American states have signed on and of those they have carved out huge items including construction in some cases and public transit in others," he continued in an interview. "The government is grossly overselling a questionable, underwhelming and late deal... It's going to open us up to more American competition but it's not clear to me how much access we're going to gain in return. The government was desperate for a symbolic victory... a photo op."
Canadian Auto Workers economist Jim Stanford paints an even bleaker picture. "Where the Buy American exemption is time-limited, Canada's offer is mostly permanent," he says.
Trade analyst Scott Sinclair agrees. Canadian suppliers will have a brief opportunity to access at most $4 billion to $5 billion in U.S. stimulus spending while the U.S. will gain ongoing access to $25 billion to $30 billion of annual Canadian procurement.
"Canadian provincial and municipal governments and other public authorities have given up the right to use purchasing as a policy tool in the name of ceding more private access to public-sector resources and further restrictions on the ability of all levels of government to negotiate local benefits," he writes in a paper for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
Meanwhile, existing U.S. World Trade Organization exemptions bar Canadian suppliers from all federally funded mass-transit, highway construction and public-utility contracts and allow the U.S. to continue to apply existing buy-local preferences. Also, Canada will have no access to the 13 states outside the WTO procurement agreement.
It's a sad but familiar story. The original 1989 Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was negotiated to give Canadian softwood lumber manufacturers "guaranteed access" to the U.S. "Guaranteed access" never happened.
MORE:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/
nothing-free-about-trade-with-us-84557142.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
There's No Such Thing as a Free Market -- Just a Matter of Who Pays for It
http://www.alternet.org/story/145726/
By Terrence McNally and Raj Patel, AlterNet
Posted on February 19, 2010, Printed on February 19, 2010
Raj Patel opens his new book, The Value of Nothing: How to Reshape Market Society and Redefine Democracy, with Oscar Wilde’s observation that “nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.” Patel shows how our faith in prices as a way of valuing the world is misplaced. Revealing the hidden ecological and social costs of a hamburger -- as much as $200 -- he asks how we came to have markets in the first place. Both the corporate capture of government and our current financial crisis, Patel argues, are a result of our bankrupt political system. Searching for solutions, Patel goes back to basics in both economics and politics.
Raj Patel has worked for the World Bank and WTO and been tear-gassed on four continents protesting against them. He is a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley’s Center for African Studies, a researcher at the School of Development Studies at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, a fellow at the Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First) and the author of Stuffed and Starved. Though recently heralded as the Maitreya (or chosen one) by members of Share International, Patel protests he's just an ordinary bloke.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145726/
====================
11. Remodelling the world challenge of this century
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Remodelling+world+challenge+this+century/2569489/story.html
By Paul Hanley, The Star Phoenix February 16, 2010
"What we do in the world flows from how we interpret the world," said the late, great ecologist Charles Birch. The global environmental crisis, he said, can be traced to the models, paradigms or world views we use collectively, often unconsciously, to guide the way we do things. These models are built from our understanding of the world and our role in it.
It is increasingly obvious to a growing number of observers that currently dominant world views are contributing to unsustainable behaviour that, if unchecked, must inevitably lead to the collapse of civilization.
"Nothing less than the current logic of world civilization" runs counter to the well-being of the Earth, writes Al Gore. For Thomas Homer-Dixon, "A value system that makes endless growth the primary source of our social stability and spiritual well-being will destroy us." A literature scan yields hundreds of similar statements that come round to a need to shift "the collection of values and assumptions that determines our basic understanding of how we fit into the universe."
What are the world views or models by which civilization operates?
Though they vary from place to place and over time, there appear to be two main models, which might be described as ecocentric and anthropocentric.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Remodelling+world+challenge+this+century/2569489/story.html
=========================
12. Saskatchewan Environmental Society – Upcoming Events – Feb. 17.10
UpComing Events
In this posting you will find:
1. Upcoming Events
2. Notices
3. Listen Up
1. UpComing Events:
February 24, 2010 Regina
EnerGuide and ecoENERGY Retrofit
Where: 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm, Glen Elm Library
Is winter causing your energy costs to soar! Meet a SaskEnergy representative who will explain the Saskatchewan EnerGuide for Houses and federal ecoENERGY Retrofit programs being offered by the Government of Saskatchewan and Natural Resources Canada. Also, there will be tips on what you can do to make your home more energy efficient. Pre-register by calling 777-6080.
February 25, 2010 Saskatoon
Hop on Board!
Where: Winston’s Pub & Grill, lower level, 243-21st Street East
7:00 PM - 7:30 PM Presentation
7:30 PM - 8:00 PM Social
Saskatchewan Environmental Society invites you to an information night. Find out what SES is all about and how you can be involved! For more information contact 665-1915.
February 26, 2010 Saskatoon
Lunch and Learn – Solar Technology in Building
Where: Green bag lunch & learn (free): 12:15pm to 1:00pm, (short presentations from all 3 speakers: bring your own lunch), Afternoon teaching session: 1:00pm to 3:00pm. University of Saskatchewan School of Education, studio A (downstairs), University of Regina School of Education, room 158 (sites connected by videoconference facilities)
Speakers: Dr ROB DUMONT, KEN KELLN (Kelln Solar), KELLY WINDER (SRC)
Solar design for buildings - design principles, good practice, available grants
Cost: non-members $30, members $20, students $10). Event presented by Canada Green Building Council SK Chapter
Register now at http://www.picatic.com/ticket/event691560
For more information go to http://www.cagbc.org/chapters/saskatche ... /index.php
February 27, 2010 Saskatoon
Northern Owl Trip
Where: 7:30 AM - 10:30 PM, meet at the south-west corner of Lawson Heights’ Mall parking lot
Join members of the Saskatoon Nature Society as they go for a drive to northern areas looking for Northern Hawk Owls and Great Gray Owls. Participants may leave early. Bring a lunch. For more information contact Marten Stoffel, 934-3769.
March 1, 2010 Regina
Sustainability Fair
Where: 10 AM - 3:30 PM, Campion College, Univeristy of Regina Campus
Come learn how to live a more sustainable life at the Sustainability Fair. For more information, email Katherine Arbuthnott, Katherine.Arbuthnott@uregina.ca
March 2, 2010 Saskatoon
Carbon Footprint Symposium: How changes to the MARKETPLACE could affect EXPORTS and VALUE CHAINS
For more information see: http://www.seda.sk.ca/2010-carbon-footprint-info.html or phone 306.384.5817
March 3-4, 2010 Saskatoon
Sustainable Saskatchewan Conference
For more information see: http://www.seda.sk.ca/content/cal-2010- ... erence.pdf or phone 306.384.5817
March 4, 2010 Regina
Green Drinks Regina
Where: 5:30 PM - ?, Abstractions Café, 2161 Rose St.
This month’s host is Check-It Monitoring Solutions Inc. which is based in Regina and focused on providing complete end to end technology solutions for our customers across North America. Check-It integrates various hardware components into a packaged solution by gathering data, storing it securely and displaying it within a robust web-based application. Check-It provides customers with on-demand detailed information that is flexible and easy to use so that they can manage their resources and take steps to conserve. Check Monitoring Solutions Inc. offers an Energy Management Service that helps our customers understand and manage their energy consumption. The overall energy consumption as well as usage of individual energy circuits (such as rooms or appliances) can be monitored within any property. Information is transmitted over the Internet and viewed via the web. With the ability to view real-time, historical and projected energy data and receive automatic alerts when energy reaches certain thresholds, customers will better understand their energy consumption which will help them control and reduce their usage. For more product information, visit our web site at www.check-it.ca
Green Drinks is an informal, come-and-go gathering of environmental professionals, students, and citizens interested in sustainability. Also note that Green Drinks Regina is looking for organizations to host Green Drinks each month. Hosting entails arriving early to welcome people to Green Drinks, offering a five to ten minute presentation on your organization, and contributing to any booking fees. It is a good chance to showcase your organization’s achievements and to seek out partners, opportunities and potential employees.
Come out to Green Drinks for lively conversations, and new connections. For more information on Green Drinks Regina, to be added to our e-mail list or to RSVP to this event (allowing the venue to staff accordingly) e-mail us at: greendrinksregina@gmail.com or rsvp via the Green Drinks Regina facebook event.
March 5-7, 2010 Saskatoon
5th Annual Saskatchewan Environmental Film Festival: See the Change, Be the Change
For more information visit http://econet.sk.ca/filmfest/films2010.html or phone (306) 652-1275.
March 10, 2010 Saskatoon
Native Plants of Saskatchewan
Where: 7 PM, J.S. Wood Library, 1801 Lansdowne Ave.
Chet Neufeld, Executive Director of the Native Plant Society of Saskatchewan, will talk about gardening with native plants. Gardening with native plants requires no pesticides or fertilizer and many require very little water. Learn what plants are adapted to our climate and attract birds, butterflies and bees. For more information phone 665-1915.
March 13, 2010 Saskatoon
Seedy Saturday
Where: 12 PM - 4:30 PM, Princess Alexandra School
Join us for Saskatoon’s 12th Seedy Saturday on Saturday March 13, 2010 at Princess Alexandra School, 210 Avenue H South, from noon - 4:30 pm. Admission is $2.00. Seedy Saturday is a family-friendly eco-fair promoting open pollinated and heirloom seed saving, biodiversity and sustainable living. It’s the perfect time to celebrate spring with garden speakers, like-minded exhibitors, a children’s area and refreshments. More information can be found at http://www.chep.org .
To book a table, call Ruth Anne Rudack at 655-5322
March 16, 2010 Regina
Native Prairie Speaker Series: “Riparian Assessments”
Where: 12:10-12:50pm, Royal Saskatchewan Museum Auditorium, Regina, SK (corner of Albert St. & College Ave.)
Guest speaker: Etienne Soulodre P.Ag, Range Agrologist, Saskatchewan Watershed Authority
Hosted by the Prairie Conservation Action Plan
March 16, 2010 Saskatoon
A Chemical Reaction
Where: 7 PM, Auditorium, City Hospital
The Canadian Cancer Society and the Saskatchewan Environmental Society are honoured to host the premiere of:
A CHEMICAL REACTION: AN ACCLAIMED DOCUMENTARY FILM BY BRETT PLYMALE that tells the story of one of the most powerful and effective community initiatives in the history of North America the Canadian movement to ban lawn and garden pesticides. The Trailer for the Award-Winning and controversial film can be viewed by going to www.cancer.ca/sk The movie will be followed by a question and answer session with Paul Tukey – Organic Lawn Care Expert and Executive Producer of the film. A Book Signing for Paul Tukey’s The Organic Lawn Care Manual will follow. Admission by donation. To find out more please contact: Sanela Begic, Canadian Cancer Society sbegic@sk.cancer.ca or 790-9881.
To join the fight and make SK pesticide free visit www.cancer.ca/sk/takeaction
March 17, 2010 Regina
A Chemical Reaction
Where: 7 PM, Education Auditorium, University of Regina
The Canadian Cancer Society and the Saskatchewan Environmental Society are honoured to host the premiere of:
A CHEMICAL REACTION: AN ACCLAIMED DOCUMENTARY FILM BY BRETT PLYMALE that tells the story of one of the most powerful and effective community initiatives in the history of North America the Canadian movement to ban lawn and garden pesticides. The Trailer for the Award-Winning and controversial film can be viewed by going to www.cancer.ca/sk The movie will be followed by a question and answer session with Paul Tukey – Organic Lawn Care Expert and Executive Producer of the film. A Book Signing for Paul Tukey’s The Organic Lawn Care Manual will follow. Admission by donation. To find out more please contact: Sanela Begic, Canadian Cancer Society sbegic@sk.cancer.ca or 790-9881.
To join the fight and make SK pesticide free visit www.cancer.ca/sk/takeaction
March 19, 2010 Saskatoon
5th Annual “Think Global, Eat Local”
Where: Hilton Garden Inn, 1st Ave. at 22nd St.
6 PM reception/cash bar
7 PM dinner/wine bar
8 PM program/music/dancing
Tickets: $60 per person or $450 per table of 8 • U of S student price $35
Income tax receipts for a portion of the ticket price.
To order tickets or for more information, call (306) 655-4575 or visit www.chep.org
March 20, 2010 Regina
Organic Gardening Class
Where: 2 PM - 4 PM, Sherwood Library
**Must pre-register with the library for this class
Instructor: Paula Hjertaas, Saskatchewan Network Against Pesticides (SNAP). For more information visit http://www.snapinfo.ca/
March 25-26, 2010 Saskatoon
Road Map Saskatoon Forum
Where: TCU Place
This year’s forum will focus on the theme Sustainability = Good Business $ence. The 2010 Forum is designed to help business and organizations in Saskatoon recognize that making workplace changes that incorporate sustainable principles and design can have significant positive effects on their bottom line. Road Map Saskatoon is excited to welcome Matt McCulloch, director of the Pembina Institute’s Corporate Consulting Services, as Keynote speaker on Thursday, March 25th.
Registration now open. Early Bird registration closes March 1st! Details at: http://bit.ly/c622qu .
March 25-26, 2010 Regina
Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Council Spring Forum
For more information and/or to register visit http://www.saskwastereduction.ca/forums ... egina.html or phone (306) 931-3242.
July 26-27, 2010 Regina
Monarch Teacher Network (MTN)
Where: Regina Public School Office, 8:30 am - 3:00 pm.
The workshop is designed for teachers of all kinds to learn about the Monarch life stages, their fascinating journey, and also about the importance of pollinators and their food sources. But all interested adults are encouraged to register and get up close and personal with the beautiful Monarch butterflies. For more information and to register, visit http://www.monarchteachernetwork-westerncanada.com/
2. Notices:
Prairie Master Gardeners Winter Classes
Upcoming Prairie Master Gardener Winter Classes – all classes are open to those registered in the PMG program and also to the general public.
All classes are 2.5 hours long, cost $25 per class and are held at the Saskatoon School of Horticulture, 226 – 20th St. East, Saskatoon. Morning classes are from 9:30 to 12:00 noon and afternoon classes are from 1:00 to 3:30.
To register for classes or for additional information please contact us at prairie.mastergardeners@gmail.com or call 651.1457.
PMG Compulsory Courses - Level 1
February 13th (afternoon) Woody Ornamentals. We need the woody ornamentals for year-round garden appeal. Learn what grows in our climate and how to grow them successfully.
February 27th (morning) Garden Problems and How to Solve Them. Learn how to diagnose and solve common garden problems. Often it is easier than you think!
March 13th (morning) Vegetables. Growing your own food is healthy and satisfying. Learn how and what to grow successfully in your garden.
April 17th (morning) Fruit Production. This class is all about basic fruit production and yes, you will be surprised at the variety of fruits we can grow on the prairies.
PMG Elective Courses - Level 1
February 13th (morning) Horticultural Therapy Explore how plants and gardening activities may be used in programs for therapy and rehabilitation.
February 27th (afternoon) Marketing / Business Management. So, you want to make money from your horticultural activities? Here are some ideas for you.
March 13th (afternoon) Landscaping. Designing gardens big and small!
April 17th (afternoon) Propagation. Find out about starting plants from cuttings, seeds, dividing roots and air layering.
Earth Day Canada Environmental Scholarship Opportunity
Earth Day Canada has launched the 2010 Toyota Earth Day Scholarship Program. Twenty $5,000 scholarships will be awarded to students across Canada who have distinguished themselves through environmental community service, extracurricular and volunteer activities, and academic excellence. One exceptional student will also be presented with the Toyota Earth Day Scholarship National Award and a Panasonic notebook computer.
The deadline to apply is February 28, 2010. Application material and information is available online at http://www.earthday.ca/scholarship. For program information, please contact Jo Anne Tacorda at 416 599-1991 ext. 109.
3. Listen Up:
Pocket Mulch Saskatoon
Tune in every Wednesday 6:30 PM to 90.5FM CFCR Saskatoon’s Community Radio for up-to-date on environmental happenings around the world and in Saskatoon, as well as interesting environmental issues in the news. To listen to Pocket Mulch, check your dial at 90.5FM or on the web at http://www.cfcr.ca/
Saskatchewan Environmental Society
203 Idylwyld Drive South, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Canada S7M 1L6
Box 1372 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada S7K 3N9
Email: info@environmentalsociety.ca
Tel:(306) 665-1915
Fax: (306) 665-2128
=======================
13. Saskatchewan Eco-Network (SEN) Info Bulletin
February 18, 2010
If you have received this bulletin from another source, and would like to subscribe directly, send an email to sen@link.ca, with a message or subject "please subscribe". If you would like to unsubscribe, send an email with a message or subject "please unsubscribe". If your email client doesn't display this bulletin correctly, you can view this document on the internet at http://www.econet.sk.ca/bulletin/20100218.html. If you have comments or suggestions, send an email to sen@link.ca.
News
Environmental Film Festival: See the Change, Be the Change
Shutting Off the Tap - A Water Conservation Challenge
Work Crews Re-enter Flooded Cigar Lake Mine
Action Alert
Resources
Workshop: Introduction to Transition
Sentinel Hotspots Launch: Western Canadian Environmental Issues
Events
Regina
Saskatoon
Other
Opportunities/Calls for Delegates/Proposals
ENGO Participation in International Biodiversity Day Activities
Research Grants: Royal Canadian Geographical Society
Earth Day Canada Environmental Scholarship Opportunity
Environment Canada’s “Nature Matters! Contest”
ENGO Participation in the Food Regulatory Advisory Committee
Earth Day Canada: Every Day Heroes Film Competition
Volunteer Opportunities
Volunteers Needed: Caring For Our Watersheds
Important Bird Area Caretakers Needed
Employment Opportunities
Editor/Publisher: Briarpatch Magazine
National Farmers Union: 2 Positions: Executive Director & Director of Policy & Research
Saskatchewan Eco-Network
535 - 8th St. E., Saskatoon SK S7H 0P9
Phone (306) 652-1275
Email sen@link.ca
===============================
14. WATCH: Report: Largest Corporations Responsible for $2.2T in Environmental Damage
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/19/headlines/
report_largest_corporations_responsible_for_22t_in_environmental_damage
A newly revealed United Nations study estimates the world’s 3,000 largest corporations are responsible for over $2.2 trillion in environmental damage. The unpublished report was conducted by the Principles for Responsible Investment Initiative and the United Nations Environment Programme. The study says the companies would have to divert one-third of their profits to pay for the environmental damage they’ve caused.
Compilation:
1. Critics say Province is 'guessing' on Darlington price tag
2. “Buy American” deal will hit PEI hard, says Council of Canadians
3. Five NATO countries want US nukes out of Europe
4. Faith in fission
5. Weekly Mulch: Nuclear Plants Will Go Up in Georgia
6. President Obama's Nuclear Reversal
7. Government Study: Elevated Uranium Levels in Grand Canyon's Watershed
8. Time Magazine: Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
9. France exposed troops to radiation
10. Nothing 'free' about trade with U.S.
11. Remodelling the world challenge of this century
12. Saskatchewan Environmental Society – Upcoming Events – Feb. 17.10
13. Saskatchewan Eco-Network (SEN) Info Bulletin
14. WATCH: Report: Largest Corporations Responsible for $2.2T in Environmental Damage
===========================
1. Critics say Province is 'guessing' on Darlington price tag
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/durham/
article/148621
Durham Business Times, Thu Feb 18 2010, Page 01
By Jennifer Stone, jstone@durhamregion.com
CLARINGTON -- Rough, very preliminary estimates indicate refurbishment of Darlington's four nuclear reactors, to extend their generation capability
to about 2050, will cost $6 billion to $10 billion, says Infrastructure and Energy Minister Brad Duguid.
Ontario Power Generation announced a reinvestment plan Tuesday which would see a $300 million upgrade to allow Pickering to run for approximately another decade, as well as the intention to refurbish the four reactors at Darlington, to extend their lifetime to about 2050.
The plan was met with immediate criticism at Queen's Park, as New Democrats questioned how the government could be sure the plan is the most cost-effective way to ensure Ontario's power supply.
Mr. Duguid "said the refurbishment is cost-effective, but refused to tell Ontarians how much the rebuild will cost," said Peter Tabuns, the NDP's Toronto Danforth MPP, according to Wednesday's Instant Hansard, a record of proceedings of the provincial legislature. "Why won't the minister share the expected cost of the refurbishment of the Darlington plant and the alternatives that were considered so that Ontarians can be sure that this decision is not yet another example of the McGuinty government's blind faith in costly and risky nuclear plants?"
OPG officials say firm costs can't be known until preliminary studies, set to be carried out over the next four years, determine the scope of work to be completed during the refurbishment.
But, given what's known so far, a "very preliminary" estimate puts the refurbishment work in the $6 billion to $10 billion range, Mr. Duguid said in an interview.
MORE: http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/durham/
article/148621
======================
2. “Buy American” deal will hit PEI hard, says Council of Canadians
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:00 AM
The Guardian reports that, "The Council of Canadians is raising questions about the Buy American trade deal announced by the Stephen Harper government."
Leo Broderick of Charlottetown, vice-chair of the Council of Canadians, says, “Canada is giving away far more than it can receive in this deal. And to make matters much worse, the provinces have been included in the World Trade Organization’s government procurement agreement. It’s a disaster for local governments and an attack on democracy. This means here on Prince Edward Island, the P.E.I. government has given up its right to give preferential treatment to contracting policies that favour local businesses. It has also given up the right to give preference to Canadian suppliers, buy-local food policies and centralized purchasing of school materials and pharmaceuticals for example. At the same time the Buy American policies in the U.S.A. remain intact. The local Council of Canadians is asking why Premier Robert Ghiz agreed to this deal. And what did the Harper give P.E.I. in return?”
The full article can be read at http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/
index.cfm?sid=328461&sc=98.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
===========================
3. Five NATO countries want US nukes out of Europe
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=4132
February 20, 2010
Five NATO countries plan to call for the removal of all U.S. tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, reports Agence France Presse (Pascal Mallet, “Allied bid for Obama to remove US European nuclear stockpile,” AFP, 19 February 2010).
The five–Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Norway–include three of the four or five European NATO members that still participate in the controversial NATO “nuclear-sharing” program, under which U.S. nuclear weapons are stored on Allied airbases and Allied pilots are trained to deliver the weapons in the event of a NATO decision to use them. Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Italy each maintain one fighter-bomber squadron equipped with U.S. B-61 nuclear bombs. Turkey also may still be participating in the program, but this has not been confirmed. In addition to the nuclear-sharing program, the U.S. stockpiles B-61 bombs in Italy and Turkey for the use of U.S. forces. In total, about 150-200 U.S. bombs are thought to be based in Europe.
The bid to remove the weapons comes as NATO is considering how to update its “Strategic Concept” document, which (among other elements) spells out the role of nuclear weapons in NATO strategy. The last update of the Strategic Concept took place in 1999. The Canadian government tried to encourage NATO to reduce its reliance on nuclear weapons during the run-up to that review. But there was little buy-in from the other NATO allies at that time.
About the best we can hope for this time around is that Canada won’t try to stand in the way of a saner approach to NATO nuclear policy.
Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, NATO, NATO Strategic Concept, Netherlands, Norway, Nuclear weapons
========================
4. Faith in fission
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/
archive/2010/02/19/lawrence-solomon-faith-in-fission.aspx
Environmentalism is the religion of the left, but many on the right blindly follow a misguided dogma of their own
Lawrence Solomon National Post 19 February 2010
Environmentalism is the religion of the left, commentators often pronounce: “The Church of the Environment,” as conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer puts it.
I have no argument with them here. Many environmentalists have taken leave of their senses, making a ritual of recycling and a demon of carbon dioxide, a colourless, odourless and tasteless gas that is indispensable to all life on Earth. By conducting mystical inquisitions into our imagined carbon footprints instead of focusing on core issues such as protecting our air and water, environmentalists hurt their cause.
But those on the right, particularly in the U.S., have their own dogma, one that is equally irrational and that also hurts their cause. The religion of the right is Nuclear Power.
“Go nuclear,” urges Charles Krauthammer. “The nation should generate much more than the one-fifth of its electricity nuclear power currently produces”, urges conservative columnist George Will. Build 50 more nuclear plants, urges William Kristol of The Weekly Standard. “Senate Republicans support building 100 new plants as quickly as possible,” maintains Mitch
McConnell, the Republican Senate Minority Leader.
All these defenders of the right preach the virtues of competition and free markets, of fiscal restraint, of small government, of innovations born of the entrepreneurial spirit. All preach the fallacy of thinking the government should be in the business of picking winners. Yet such is their faith that none are troubled by nuclear power’s role as the antithesis of everything their secular selves believe.
Not one nuclear plant, anywhere in the world, has ever been built without government subsidies of some kind. The only country that has enthusiastically embraced nuclear power — France, which obtains close to 80% of its electricity from its state-owned reactors — drove its power sector to financial ruin: “Catastrophic,” in the frank words of the president of Electricite de France, the state-owned power company. The only privately owned nuclear generating company that operated in a competitive environment — British Energy, which inherited the best reactors in the U.K. fleet after the U.K.’s state-owned monopoly was broken up and privatized — soon went bankrupt and was taken back by the U.K. government at taxpayer expense.
Commercial nuclear power is the most heavily subsidized industry in the history of the world and the single biggest money-loser in the history of business.
MORE:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/
archive/2010/02/19/lawrence-solomon-faith-in-fission.aspx
============================
5. Weekly Mulch: Nuclear Plants Will Go Up in Georgia
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/30560
Feb. 19.10
If you were to look out to the horizon of the clean energy field right now, you would see the hazy outlines of nuclear reactors. President Barack Obama announced this week that two new nuclear plants will go up in Georgia, built on the promise that the federal government will guarantee $8.3 billion in loans—nearly the entire estimated cost of the project.
“It is a slap in the face to environmentalists,” says Matthew Rothschild at The Progressive. “Though these will be the first nuclear reactors constructed in more than three decades, Obama still labeled them, somehow, as part of the “technologies of tomorrow.””
The president’s announcement wasn’t the only environmental downer this week. Expectations for the next international climate negotiations, to be held in Mexico at the end of 2010, are already low, and yesterday Yvo de Boer, the United Nations’ top climate negotiator, said he would step down this summer and join the private sector. To top it all off, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) now faces sixteen lawsuits that would block its ability to decrease carbon emissions, including one backed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R).
A nuclear error
Although the Georgia reactors would be the first new nuclear construction in the country in decades, they mark the beginning of what the Obama administration hopes will be a shift towards nuclear energy. In the 2011 budget, President Obama proposed an expansion of the loan guarantee program that funds projects like these from $18.5 billion to $54.5 billion.
These nuclear projects deserve close scrutiny. At AlterNet, Harvey Wasserman details the problems with the Georgia reactors. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) already rejected the initial designs for the plant. That means the estimated cost could well exceed the projected $8.5 billion, which Wasserman says, was low at the start.
“Over the past several years the estimated price tag for proposed new reactors has jumped from $2-3 billion each, in some cases to more than $12 billion today,” he explains.
Risky business
In the past, energy firms like The Southern Company, the Atlanta-based group that is building the plants, could only imagine securing funding for new nuclear projects. These projects have a high risk of failure, and private investors do not dream of touching them.
Inter Press Service’s Julio Godoy reviewed several European studies on the feasibility of financing nuclear plants. One study from Citibank concluded that “the risks faced by developers … are so large and variable that individually they could each bring even the largest utility company to its knees financially,” Godoy reports. These risks include uncontrollable construction costs, long delays, and the possibility of low power prices that would not support that plants’ operation.
That’s one reason that green advocates disapprove of nuclear energy: The money could be better spent elsewhere. “People tend to think that environmentalists have some sort of allergic reaction to nuclear because they’re scared of radioactive waste and unsecured nuclear materials,” writes Aaron Wiener at The Washington Independent. “But when it comes down to it…It’s simply a bad investment to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into a nuclear sinkhole when proven technologies such as wind and solar would provide guaranteed benefits.”
Wind to fly on
While the administration lavishes attention on nuclear, other clean energy industries are trying to move forward. In Wisconsin, a Spanish company is opening up a plant to build wind turbine components, which will bring much-needed jobs to the Milwaukee area, as Kari Lydersen reports for Working In These Times.
There’s always the threat, however, that gains like this will be rolled back by competition from China. Clean energy jobs can still be sent overseas, Lydersen points out. She argues that the United State could be providing a boost to the solar and wind industry in order to keep jobs here.
“Manufacturing in the United States could be driven both with incentives to the actual producers – like the tax break to Ingeteam [the Spanish company building the Wisconsin plant] and support for renewable energy through renewable energy portfolio (RPS) standards and other incentives,” she writes.
China as competition
From a purely environmental perspective, China’s headway into green technology is not a problem. Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum reminds us that the whole world can benefit from advances in clean energy, wherever they happen. Climate change is, after all, a global crisis. But Drum concedes that fear of Chinese competition does serve some purpose:
“I’ve lately become more receptive to the idea that, for better or worse, the only way to get Americans to take this stuff seriously is to kick it old school and start hauling out that old time Cold War evangelism,” he says. “Frame green tech as a matter of vital economic and national security superiority over the Reds and quit worrying overmuch about whether that’s really technically accurate. Just figure that it’s close enough, it’s language everyone understands, and it’ll do a better job of motivating development than a couple hundred more PowerPoints about receding glaciers.”
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Pulse, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
========================
6. President Obama's Nuclear Reversal
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/19-11
by Erich Pica
Published on Friday, February 19, 2010 by The Huffington Post
President Obama announced Tuesday [1] that the Department of Energy is awarding $8 billion in taxpayer dollars towards loan guarantees [2] to build the United States' first nuclear reactors in nearly thirty years. This move may be politically expedient, but for the public, it's a raw deal.
As a candidate, Obama expressed openness to new reactors, but said [3], "Before an expansion... is considered, key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation."
President Obama should heed candidate Obama's advice [4]. These issues have not been addressed. If anything, the challenges facing the nuclear industry have grown worse.
With Yucca Mountain a no-go [5], there is still nowhere to put the radioactive waste piling up across the country. New reactors would only add to the waste problem and could increase pressure to reprocess spent fuel, a dangerous and costly scheme that would increase waste streams.
There's also still no way to ensure reactors' safety. Reports [6] of Homer Simpson-like lapses [7] by staff at reactor sites abound, and the FBI has called nuclear facilities "target rich" [8] environments for terrorists. More reactors also mean more weapons-usable material, increasing the risk of proliferation.
The fiscal implications of President Obama's position are alarming. For decades, the industry has depended on taxpayer support. Investing in emerging technologies that can eventually thrive on their own makes sense, but the nuclear industry doesn't fit the bill. After more than 50 years as one of the biggest recipients of federal subsidies, the industry should sink or swim on its own.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/19-11
===========================
7. Government Study: Elevated Uranium Levels in Grand Canyon's Watershed - Exploration and Mining Sites Consistently Exceed Background Levels
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/19-1
CONTACT: Conservation Groups
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club, (602) 999-5790
Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Trust, (928) 774-7466
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 19, 2010 1:35 PM
GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK - February 19 - A series of studies [1] released today by the United States Geological Survey show elevated uranium levels in wells, springs, and soil in and around uranium exploration and mining sites within the watershed feeding Grand Canyon National Park and the Colorado River. The agency conducted the monitoring to provide information for an environmental impact statement that is analyzing a proposed 20-year mineral withdrawal that would protect nearly 1 million acres of public land surrounding Grand Canyon National Park from future mining activities.
"These reports demonstrate unequivocally that uranium mining should not proceed in these environmentally sensitive lands," said Stacey Hamburg of the Sierra Club's Grand Canyon Chapter. "Contaminated lands and waters around the Grand Canyon are not what we want for the future of northern Arizona. Cleaning up contaminated sites should be the government's first priority."
Elevated uranium levels consistently exceed natural background levels in and around exploration and old mining sites - sometimes, as in the case of the Kanab North mine, by as much as 10 times. Elevated uranium levels were also detected near the old "Hack" uranium-mine complex, which the Bureau of Land Management actively promotes on its Web site [2] as a model of good mine reclamation (see video here [3]). Reclaimed in the 1980s, the mines are located in Hack Canyon, a tributary to Kanab Creek and the Grand Canyon and Colorado River.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/19-1
============================
8. Time Magazine: Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 46,00.html
Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
By MICHAEL GRUNWALD, Time Magazine, Thursday, Feb. 18, 2010
If you want to understand why the U.S. hasn't built a nuclear reactor in three decades, the Vogtle power plant outside Atlanta is an excellent reminder of the insanity of nuclear economics. The plant's original cost estimate was less than $1 billion for four reactors. Its eventual price tag in 1989 was nearly $9 billion, for only two reactors. But now there's widespread chatter about a nuclear renaissance, so the Southern Co. is finally trying to build the other two reactors at Vogtle. The estimated cost: $14 billion. And you can be sure that number is way too low, because nuclear cost estimates are always way too low.
That's why no Wall Street moneyman in his right mind would finance a new reactor. But President Obama has located an alternative financier: you. On Tuesday he announced an $8.33 billion loan guarantee for the new Vogtle reactors, the first step in the Administration's push to jump-start the nuclear construction industry. Obama also urged Congress to set aside political differences and triple the budget for nuclear loan guarantees. "On an issue that affects our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, we can't keep on being mired in the same old stale debates between the left and the right, between environmentalists and entrepreneurs," Obama said.
But the President is ignoring a much fresher debate: between theory and reality. Even if Obama were correct that a nuclear rebirth is needed to address the climate crisis — and he isn't correct — the fact is that the rebirth isn't happening. Despite the prospect of new taxpayer guarantees — and the cradle-to-grave subsidies that already support this 50-year-old industry at the federal and state level — utilities keep scrapping or delaying plans for new reactors.
MORE:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 46,00.html
==========================
9. France exposed troops to radiation
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Franc ... radiation/
2575119/story.html
The Telegraph February 17, 2010
France used its infantry as "guinea pigs" in open-air nuclear tests in the 1960s, ordering them in one instance to carry out war games within 640 metres of a blast epicentre, previously unseen records have shown.
The 260-page report was compiled in 1998 and details military exercises conducted after four atmospheric tests in the Algerian desert in 1961, and 13 underground tests up until 1966.
MORE:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Franc ... radiation/
2575119/story.html
===============================
10. Nothing 'free' about trade with U.S.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/
nothing-free-about-trade-with-us-84557142.html
By: Frances Russell 17/02/2010 1:00 AM | Winnipeg Free Press·
Canadians will import another big dose of American social and economic inequality with yet another bad trade deal made in our endless -- and endlessly futile -- pursuit of the Holy Grail of "guaranteed access" to the U.S. market.
Canada's so-called "exemption" from the about-to-expire Buy America stimulus package will be minimal and, as usual, subject to cancellation at American whim.
Also as usual, Boy Scout Canada has put almost all it has to give on the American table. U.S. business will gain nearly unfettered access to the multibillion-dollar public purchasing of all provinces, territories, cities with more than 50,000 inhabitants and public entities including Crown corporations, universities, school boards and health-care institutions.
And what do Canadians get? Liberal international trade critic Scott Brison says more than 75 per cent of the U.S. stimulus package has already been spent "so the best we can get is just the crumbs."
"Canada didn't obtain any guarantees on future American spending programs... Only 37 of the American states have signed on and of those they have carved out huge items including construction in some cases and public transit in others," he continued in an interview. "The government is grossly overselling a questionable, underwhelming and late deal... It's going to open us up to more American competition but it's not clear to me how much access we're going to gain in return. The government was desperate for a symbolic victory... a photo op."
Canadian Auto Workers economist Jim Stanford paints an even bleaker picture. "Where the Buy American exemption is time-limited, Canada's offer is mostly permanent," he says.
Trade analyst Scott Sinclair agrees. Canadian suppliers will have a brief opportunity to access at most $4 billion to $5 billion in U.S. stimulus spending while the U.S. will gain ongoing access to $25 billion to $30 billion of annual Canadian procurement.
"Canadian provincial and municipal governments and other public authorities have given up the right to use purchasing as a policy tool in the name of ceding more private access to public-sector resources and further restrictions on the ability of all levels of government to negotiate local benefits," he writes in a paper for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
Meanwhile, existing U.S. World Trade Organization exemptions bar Canadian suppliers from all federally funded mass-transit, highway construction and public-utility contracts and allow the U.S. to continue to apply existing buy-local preferences. Also, Canada will have no access to the 13 states outside the WTO procurement agreement.
It's a sad but familiar story. The original 1989 Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was negotiated to give Canadian softwood lumber manufacturers "guaranteed access" to the U.S. "Guaranteed access" never happened.
MORE:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/
nothing-free-about-trade-with-us-84557142.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
There's No Such Thing as a Free Market -- Just a Matter of Who Pays for It
http://www.alternet.org/story/145726/
By Terrence McNally and Raj Patel, AlterNet
Posted on February 19, 2010, Printed on February 19, 2010
Raj Patel opens his new book, The Value of Nothing: How to Reshape Market Society and Redefine Democracy, with Oscar Wilde’s observation that “nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.” Patel shows how our faith in prices as a way of valuing the world is misplaced. Revealing the hidden ecological and social costs of a hamburger -- as much as $200 -- he asks how we came to have markets in the first place. Both the corporate capture of government and our current financial crisis, Patel argues, are a result of our bankrupt political system. Searching for solutions, Patel goes back to basics in both economics and politics.
Raj Patel has worked for the World Bank and WTO and been tear-gassed on four continents protesting against them. He is a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley’s Center for African Studies, a researcher at the School of Development Studies at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, a fellow at the Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First) and the author of Stuffed and Starved. Though recently heralded as the Maitreya (or chosen one) by members of Share International, Patel protests he's just an ordinary bloke.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145726/
====================
11. Remodelling the world challenge of this century
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Remodelling+world+challenge+this+century/2569489/story.html
By Paul Hanley, The Star Phoenix February 16, 2010
"What we do in the world flows from how we interpret the world," said the late, great ecologist Charles Birch. The global environmental crisis, he said, can be traced to the models, paradigms or world views we use collectively, often unconsciously, to guide the way we do things. These models are built from our understanding of the world and our role in it.
It is increasingly obvious to a growing number of observers that currently dominant world views are contributing to unsustainable behaviour that, if unchecked, must inevitably lead to the collapse of civilization.
"Nothing less than the current logic of world civilization" runs counter to the well-being of the Earth, writes Al Gore. For Thomas Homer-Dixon, "A value system that makes endless growth the primary source of our social stability and spiritual well-being will destroy us." A literature scan yields hundreds of similar statements that come round to a need to shift "the collection of values and assumptions that determines our basic understanding of how we fit into the universe."
What are the world views or models by which civilization operates?
Though they vary from place to place and over time, there appear to be two main models, which might be described as ecocentric and anthropocentric.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Remodelling+world+challenge+this+century/2569489/story.html
=========================
12. Saskatchewan Environmental Society – Upcoming Events – Feb. 17.10
UpComing Events
In this posting you will find:
1. Upcoming Events
2. Notices
3. Listen Up
1. UpComing Events:
February 24, 2010 Regina
EnerGuide and ecoENERGY Retrofit
Where: 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm, Glen Elm Library
Is winter causing your energy costs to soar! Meet a SaskEnergy representative who will explain the Saskatchewan EnerGuide for Houses and federal ecoENERGY Retrofit programs being offered by the Government of Saskatchewan and Natural Resources Canada. Also, there will be tips on what you can do to make your home more energy efficient. Pre-register by calling 777-6080.
February 25, 2010 Saskatoon
Hop on Board!
Where: Winston’s Pub & Grill, lower level, 243-21st Street East
7:00 PM - 7:30 PM Presentation
7:30 PM - 8:00 PM Social
Saskatchewan Environmental Society invites you to an information night. Find out what SES is all about and how you can be involved! For more information contact 665-1915.
February 26, 2010 Saskatoon
Lunch and Learn – Solar Technology in Building
Where: Green bag lunch & learn (free): 12:15pm to 1:00pm, (short presentations from all 3 speakers: bring your own lunch), Afternoon teaching session: 1:00pm to 3:00pm. University of Saskatchewan School of Education, studio A (downstairs), University of Regina School of Education, room 158 (sites connected by videoconference facilities)
Speakers: Dr ROB DUMONT, KEN KELLN (Kelln Solar), KELLY WINDER (SRC)
Solar design for buildings - design principles, good practice, available grants
Cost: non-members $30, members $20, students $10). Event presented by Canada Green Building Council SK Chapter
Register now at http://www.picatic.com/ticket/event691560
For more information go to http://www.cagbc.org/chapters/saskatche ... /index.php
February 27, 2010 Saskatoon
Northern Owl Trip
Where: 7:30 AM - 10:30 PM, meet at the south-west corner of Lawson Heights’ Mall parking lot
Join members of the Saskatoon Nature Society as they go for a drive to northern areas looking for Northern Hawk Owls and Great Gray Owls. Participants may leave early. Bring a lunch. For more information contact Marten Stoffel, 934-3769.
March 1, 2010 Regina
Sustainability Fair
Where: 10 AM - 3:30 PM, Campion College, Univeristy of Regina Campus
Come learn how to live a more sustainable life at the Sustainability Fair. For more information, email Katherine Arbuthnott, Katherine.Arbuthnott@uregina.ca
March 2, 2010 Saskatoon
Carbon Footprint Symposium: How changes to the MARKETPLACE could affect EXPORTS and VALUE CHAINS
For more information see: http://www.seda.sk.ca/2010-carbon-footprint-info.html or phone 306.384.5817
March 3-4, 2010 Saskatoon
Sustainable Saskatchewan Conference
For more information see: http://www.seda.sk.ca/content/cal-2010- ... erence.pdf or phone 306.384.5817
March 4, 2010 Regina
Green Drinks Regina
Where: 5:30 PM - ?, Abstractions Café, 2161 Rose St.
This month’s host is Check-It Monitoring Solutions Inc. which is based in Regina and focused on providing complete end to end technology solutions for our customers across North America. Check-It integrates various hardware components into a packaged solution by gathering data, storing it securely and displaying it within a robust web-based application. Check-It provides customers with on-demand detailed information that is flexible and easy to use so that they can manage their resources and take steps to conserve. Check Monitoring Solutions Inc. offers an Energy Management Service that helps our customers understand and manage their energy consumption. The overall energy consumption as well as usage of individual energy circuits (such as rooms or appliances) can be monitored within any property. Information is transmitted over the Internet and viewed via the web. With the ability to view real-time, historical and projected energy data and receive automatic alerts when energy reaches certain thresholds, customers will better understand their energy consumption which will help them control and reduce their usage. For more product information, visit our web site at www.check-it.ca
Green Drinks is an informal, come-and-go gathering of environmental professionals, students, and citizens interested in sustainability. Also note that Green Drinks Regina is looking for organizations to host Green Drinks each month. Hosting entails arriving early to welcome people to Green Drinks, offering a five to ten minute presentation on your organization, and contributing to any booking fees. It is a good chance to showcase your organization’s achievements and to seek out partners, opportunities and potential employees.
Come out to Green Drinks for lively conversations, and new connections. For more information on Green Drinks Regina, to be added to our e-mail list or to RSVP to this event (allowing the venue to staff accordingly) e-mail us at: greendrinksregina@gmail.com or rsvp via the Green Drinks Regina facebook event.
March 5-7, 2010 Saskatoon
5th Annual Saskatchewan Environmental Film Festival: See the Change, Be the Change
For more information visit http://econet.sk.ca/filmfest/films2010.html or phone (306) 652-1275.
March 10, 2010 Saskatoon
Native Plants of Saskatchewan
Where: 7 PM, J.S. Wood Library, 1801 Lansdowne Ave.
Chet Neufeld, Executive Director of the Native Plant Society of Saskatchewan, will talk about gardening with native plants. Gardening with native plants requires no pesticides or fertilizer and many require very little water. Learn what plants are adapted to our climate and attract birds, butterflies and bees. For more information phone 665-1915.
March 13, 2010 Saskatoon
Seedy Saturday
Where: 12 PM - 4:30 PM, Princess Alexandra School
Join us for Saskatoon’s 12th Seedy Saturday on Saturday March 13, 2010 at Princess Alexandra School, 210 Avenue H South, from noon - 4:30 pm. Admission is $2.00. Seedy Saturday is a family-friendly eco-fair promoting open pollinated and heirloom seed saving, biodiversity and sustainable living. It’s the perfect time to celebrate spring with garden speakers, like-minded exhibitors, a children’s area and refreshments. More information can be found at http://www.chep.org .
To book a table, call Ruth Anne Rudack at 655-5322
March 16, 2010 Regina
Native Prairie Speaker Series: “Riparian Assessments”
Where: 12:10-12:50pm, Royal Saskatchewan Museum Auditorium, Regina, SK (corner of Albert St. & College Ave.)
Guest speaker: Etienne Soulodre P.Ag, Range Agrologist, Saskatchewan Watershed Authority
Hosted by the Prairie Conservation Action Plan
March 16, 2010 Saskatoon
A Chemical Reaction
Where: 7 PM, Auditorium, City Hospital
The Canadian Cancer Society and the Saskatchewan Environmental Society are honoured to host the premiere of:
A CHEMICAL REACTION: AN ACCLAIMED DOCUMENTARY FILM BY BRETT PLYMALE that tells the story of one of the most powerful and effective community initiatives in the history of North America the Canadian movement to ban lawn and garden pesticides. The Trailer for the Award-Winning and controversial film can be viewed by going to www.cancer.ca/sk The movie will be followed by a question and answer session with Paul Tukey – Organic Lawn Care Expert and Executive Producer of the film. A Book Signing for Paul Tukey’s The Organic Lawn Care Manual will follow. Admission by donation. To find out more please contact: Sanela Begic, Canadian Cancer Society sbegic@sk.cancer.ca or 790-9881.
To join the fight and make SK pesticide free visit www.cancer.ca/sk/takeaction
March 17, 2010 Regina
A Chemical Reaction
Where: 7 PM, Education Auditorium, University of Regina
The Canadian Cancer Society and the Saskatchewan Environmental Society are honoured to host the premiere of:
A CHEMICAL REACTION: AN ACCLAIMED DOCUMENTARY FILM BY BRETT PLYMALE that tells the story of one of the most powerful and effective community initiatives in the history of North America the Canadian movement to ban lawn and garden pesticides. The Trailer for the Award-Winning and controversial film can be viewed by going to www.cancer.ca/sk The movie will be followed by a question and answer session with Paul Tukey – Organic Lawn Care Expert and Executive Producer of the film. A Book Signing for Paul Tukey’s The Organic Lawn Care Manual will follow. Admission by donation. To find out more please contact: Sanela Begic, Canadian Cancer Society sbegic@sk.cancer.ca or 790-9881.
To join the fight and make SK pesticide free visit www.cancer.ca/sk/takeaction
March 19, 2010 Saskatoon
5th Annual “Think Global, Eat Local”
Where: Hilton Garden Inn, 1st Ave. at 22nd St.
6 PM reception/cash bar
7 PM dinner/wine bar
8 PM program/music/dancing
Tickets: $60 per person or $450 per table of 8 • U of S student price $35
Income tax receipts for a portion of the ticket price.
To order tickets or for more information, call (306) 655-4575 or visit www.chep.org
March 20, 2010 Regina
Organic Gardening Class
Where: 2 PM - 4 PM, Sherwood Library
**Must pre-register with the library for this class
Instructor: Paula Hjertaas, Saskatchewan Network Against Pesticides (SNAP). For more information visit http://www.snapinfo.ca/
March 25-26, 2010 Saskatoon
Road Map Saskatoon Forum
Where: TCU Place
This year’s forum will focus on the theme Sustainability = Good Business $ence. The 2010 Forum is designed to help business and organizations in Saskatoon recognize that making workplace changes that incorporate sustainable principles and design can have significant positive effects on their bottom line. Road Map Saskatoon is excited to welcome Matt McCulloch, director of the Pembina Institute’s Corporate Consulting Services, as Keynote speaker on Thursday, March 25th.
Registration now open. Early Bird registration closes March 1st! Details at: http://bit.ly/c622qu .
March 25-26, 2010 Regina
Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Council Spring Forum
For more information and/or to register visit http://www.saskwastereduction.ca/forums ... egina.html or phone (306) 931-3242.
July 26-27, 2010 Regina
Monarch Teacher Network (MTN)
Where: Regina Public School Office, 8:30 am - 3:00 pm.
The workshop is designed for teachers of all kinds to learn about the Monarch life stages, their fascinating journey, and also about the importance of pollinators and their food sources. But all interested adults are encouraged to register and get up close and personal with the beautiful Monarch butterflies. For more information and to register, visit http://www.monarchteachernetwork-westerncanada.com/
2. Notices:
Prairie Master Gardeners Winter Classes
Upcoming Prairie Master Gardener Winter Classes – all classes are open to those registered in the PMG program and also to the general public.
All classes are 2.5 hours long, cost $25 per class and are held at the Saskatoon School of Horticulture, 226 – 20th St. East, Saskatoon. Morning classes are from 9:30 to 12:00 noon and afternoon classes are from 1:00 to 3:30.
To register for classes or for additional information please contact us at prairie.mastergardeners@gmail.com or call 651.1457.
PMG Compulsory Courses - Level 1
February 13th (afternoon) Woody Ornamentals. We need the woody ornamentals for year-round garden appeal. Learn what grows in our climate and how to grow them successfully.
February 27th (morning) Garden Problems and How to Solve Them. Learn how to diagnose and solve common garden problems. Often it is easier than you think!
March 13th (morning) Vegetables. Growing your own food is healthy and satisfying. Learn how and what to grow successfully in your garden.
April 17th (morning) Fruit Production. This class is all about basic fruit production and yes, you will be surprised at the variety of fruits we can grow on the prairies.
PMG Elective Courses - Level 1
February 13th (morning) Horticultural Therapy Explore how plants and gardening activities may be used in programs for therapy and rehabilitation.
February 27th (afternoon) Marketing / Business Management. So, you want to make money from your horticultural activities? Here are some ideas for you.
March 13th (afternoon) Landscaping. Designing gardens big and small!
April 17th (afternoon) Propagation. Find out about starting plants from cuttings, seeds, dividing roots and air layering.
Earth Day Canada Environmental Scholarship Opportunity
Earth Day Canada has launched the 2010 Toyota Earth Day Scholarship Program. Twenty $5,000 scholarships will be awarded to students across Canada who have distinguished themselves through environmental community service, extracurricular and volunteer activities, and academic excellence. One exceptional student will also be presented with the Toyota Earth Day Scholarship National Award and a Panasonic notebook computer.
The deadline to apply is February 28, 2010. Application material and information is available online at http://www.earthday.ca/scholarship. For program information, please contact Jo Anne Tacorda at 416 599-1991 ext. 109.
3. Listen Up:
Pocket Mulch Saskatoon
Tune in every Wednesday 6:30 PM to 90.5FM CFCR Saskatoon’s Community Radio for up-to-date on environmental happenings around the world and in Saskatoon, as well as interesting environmental issues in the news. To listen to Pocket Mulch, check your dial at 90.5FM or on the web at http://www.cfcr.ca/
Saskatchewan Environmental Society
203 Idylwyld Drive South, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Canada S7M 1L6
Box 1372 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada S7K 3N9
Email: info@environmentalsociety.ca
Tel:(306) 665-1915
Fax: (306) 665-2128
=======================
13. Saskatchewan Eco-Network (SEN) Info Bulletin
February 18, 2010
If you have received this bulletin from another source, and would like to subscribe directly, send an email to sen@link.ca, with a message or subject "please subscribe". If you would like to unsubscribe, send an email with a message or subject "please unsubscribe". If your email client doesn't display this bulletin correctly, you can view this document on the internet at http://www.econet.sk.ca/bulletin/20100218.html. If you have comments or suggestions, send an email to sen@link.ca.
News
Environmental Film Festival: See the Change, Be the Change
Shutting Off the Tap - A Water Conservation Challenge
Work Crews Re-enter Flooded Cigar Lake Mine
Action Alert
Resources
Workshop: Introduction to Transition
Sentinel Hotspots Launch: Western Canadian Environmental Issues
Events
Regina
Saskatoon
Other
Opportunities/Calls for Delegates/Proposals
ENGO Participation in International Biodiversity Day Activities
Research Grants: Royal Canadian Geographical Society
Earth Day Canada Environmental Scholarship Opportunity
Environment Canada’s “Nature Matters! Contest”
ENGO Participation in the Food Regulatory Advisory Committee
Earth Day Canada: Every Day Heroes Film Competition
Volunteer Opportunities
Volunteers Needed: Caring For Our Watersheds
Important Bird Area Caretakers Needed
Employment Opportunities
Editor/Publisher: Briarpatch Magazine
National Farmers Union: 2 Positions: Executive Director & Director of Policy & Research
Saskatchewan Eco-Network
535 - 8th St. E., Saskatoon SK S7H 0P9
Phone (306) 652-1275
Email sen@link.ca
===============================
14. WATCH: Report: Largest Corporations Responsible for $2.2T in Environmental Damage
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/19/headlines/
report_largest_corporations_responsible_for_22t_in_environmental_damage
A newly revealed United Nations study estimates the world’s 3,000 largest corporations are responsible for over $2.2 trillion in environmental damage. The unpublished report was conducted by the Principles for Responsible Investment Initiative and the United Nations Environment Programme. The study says the companies would have to divert one-third of their profits to pay for the environmental damage they’ve caused.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 22.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:29 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 22.10
Compilation:
1. Carbon Foot Printing Symposium – March 02.10
2. All Out March 3rd – Tell RBC Shareholders: Stop bankrolling tar sands!
3. Outcomes of premiers, governors meeting in Washington
4. Buy America deal should be subject of public hearings', says the Toronto Star
5. Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series: Dr. Walter Dorn on Canada and peacekeeping
6. Clinton criticized for dodging question on Israel nukes
7. Climate: Eight Convenient Truths
8. If you think nuclear power is safe and clean (like the President does), think again (like the President should)!
9. U.S. turns to Sweden as model in nuclear waste storage
10. Energy and Capital's Weekend Edition
11. Impending Explosion: U.S. Intensifies Threats To Russia And Iran
12. Navy dock in danger of becoming a 'nuclear dumping ground.'
=======================
1. Carbon Foot Printing Symposium – March 02.10
http://www.seda.sk.ca/2010-carbon-footprint-info.html
A number of non-governmental, private and public partners are hosting the Carbon Footprint Symposium in Saskatoon at the Sheraton Cavalier on March 2, 2010. Focus on providing insight to SME’s with regard to how they may be impacted by emerging changes towards a greener economy or global convergence on emissions limits. Registration is only $100 (includes GST).
Registration deadline is February 22, 2010.
=====================
2. All Out March 3rd – Tell RBC Shareholders: Stop bankrolling tar sands!
Check out the call to action below. There will be a rally at the Royal Bank AGM, on March 3rd in Toronto. Details below.
There are solidarity actions happening all across the country and there may be one near you that you can join!
If you would like more information, want to get involved in any other way, or want to organize your own solidarity action, contact Dave Vasey dvasey@ran.org
Or you can email me at my Rainforest Action Network address: maryam@ran.org
Maryam Adrangi
Administration Assistant- Ontario, Quebec, Nunavut Regional Office
Solidarity Actions near you:
Montreal: Contact Cam at holditdownproductions@gmail.com
Ottawa: Contact Iain at iain.brannigan@pidssa.ca
Kingston: Contact Marie at marie.bencze@gmail.com
Lindsay: Contact Ben at bprowse@flemingc.on.ca
London: Contact Toban black2@uwo.ca
Winnipeg: Contact Alon at radishoak@resist.ca
Saskatoon: Contact Jeh at jeh.custerra@gmail.com
Calgary: Contact Alex at adoukas@gmail.com
Edmonton: Contact Keely at kkidner@ualberta.ca
Victoria: Contact Caitlyn at caitlyn.vernon@gmail.com
Vancover: Contact Brennan at brennanwauters@gmail.com
All Out March 3rd – Tell RBC Shareholders: Stop bankrolling tar sands!
Join us for a morning of creative, non-violent direct action culminating in a rally outside the Metro Center at 2 pm to show solidarity with First Nations representatives.
When: morning actions, rally @ 2pm, March 3, 2010
Where: Metro Center, Toronto
On March 3rd, the Royal Bank of Canada will hold its annual general meeting of shareholders’ at the Toronto Metro Convention Center. It’s the one time every year that the bank’s top executives, board and other decision makers gather in the same place to hear from shareholders. This year, we want them to hear from you!
Since 2007 RBC has backed more than $16.9 billion (USD) in loans to companies operating in the tar sands—more than any other bank. Expansion of the tar sands is trampling the rights of Indigenous peoples, destroying globally significant ecosystems, and significantly increasing Canada’s carbon emissions.
Representatives from several First Nations impacted by tar sands expansion will attend the meeting to demand that RBC recognize the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent for Indigenous communities, and suspend its financial support for tar sands expansion.
Take Action in your area - If you are interested in organizing an action before or at RBC’s AGM, please contact Eriel Deranger eriel@ran.org or Dave Vasey dvasey@ran.org
Check out the Facebook event for more info and updates http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?ei ... 834&ref=ts
=======================
3. Outcomes of premiers, governors meeting in Washington
From: Brent Patterson
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 10:42 AM
Seven Canadian premiers met with the National Governors Association this past weekend in Washington, DC. They discussed the tar sands, climate change, trade, country of origin labelling, and hydro exports.
TAR SANDS
The Canwest News Service reports that, "Minnesota (Governor) Tim Pawlenty, stressed the importance of Canadian crude oil to his state’s economy. Pawlenty, touted as a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2012, said it would be 'very ill-advised' for the U.S. to impose any sort of barriers to Canadian oil."
"That was music to the ears of western premiers who worry U.S. state and federal lawmakers will pursue environmental and trade measures to curb Canadian petroleum exports."
“'I’ve heard Gov. (Brian) Schweitzer (of Montana) actually take to task some of those who refer to our energy exports as ‘dirty Canadian oil’ on this side of the border," (Saskatchewan premier Brad) Wall said. 'It’s been a U.S. governor who’s done that, because he has a great understanding of the fact that we’re working hard to reduce the environmental footprint around our oil production, and we are a safe, reliable source of energy for (the) economy of the U.S.'”
"The meeting 'was a huge step forward,' said New Brunswick Premier Shawn Graham, whose province supplies about 60 per cent of refined petroleum products into the Northeastern U.S. states. 'Security of supply of energy is critical for the U.S. economy to recover.'”
CLIMATE CHANGE
"Of particular concern to Wall are potential moves by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions that could prompt punishing trade barriers on Canadian exports of oil, and other carbon-rich products. EPA administrator Lisa Jackson appeared to understand that concern, Wall said, and, he was heartened to hear governors say how important Canadian oil imports are to them — particularly in states like Utah, Montana and Minnesota, where jobs rely on refining Canadian oil."
"Wall may have also convinced Jackson to follow several U.S. senators’ footsteps and visit the carbon capture and sequestration project near Weyburn, Saskatchewan, where 17 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from a coal-gasification plant in North Dakota have now been captured and stored underground."
"As Manitoba premier, (Ambassador Gary) Doer negotiated the Western Climate Initiative with several states that set regional greenhouse gas emissions goals. Deals struck between some provinces and states on tailpipe emissions are now being used as a model for national standards planned by Ottawa and Washington."
TRADE
"The premiers’ meeting with the governors followed two high-level meetings on Friday with senior White House officials, including Larry Summers, economic czar, and Jackson. Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said he pressed U.S. leaders about the depth of protectionist sentiment caused by the recent recession. 'I have been reassured that, while it always has some seductive appeal, there is a new awareness...that we have to guard against protectionism and keep our trade linkages strong.'"
"Premiers now hope Canada will get a permanent exemption from future Buy American measures. 'I think there is a good possibility they (will) recognize the need for a preferential treatment for Canada,' said Manitoba Premier Greg Selinger. 'I don’t think any of what they have tried to do...was intended to side-swipe Canada. But now we have to be there so they think about us when they make these kinds of decisions.'”
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELLING
"The premiers also met Sunday with U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to raise ongoing complaints over country-of-origin labelling rules that Canada says unfairly damage exports of meat and food products to the United States. The law has sharply reduced Canadian hog and cattle exports to the U.S. Some Canadian producers feel the rules are a result of effective lobbying by select U.S. producers attempting to protect their own livelihood, rather than concerns about the meat’s safety. According to Wall, Vilsack remains committed to enforcing the rules but expressed openness to ways of mitigating its impact on Canada."
HYDRO EXPORTS/ SALE OF NB POWER
The Globe and Mail adds that, "(Governor Pawlenty's) endorsement of Canadian hydro power underscored Minnesota's dependence on access to electricity generated by large dams in Manitoba. But it served to buttress the main message that Quebec Premier Jean Charest strived to get across at the meeting. Mr. Charest wants federal and state authorities to officially recognize Hydro-Québec's power as 'renewable' energy, putting it on equal footing with electricity from wind, solar or micro-scale hydro projects. That recognition would make it easier for Quebec to negotiate lucrative pricing on long-term sales contracts with U.S. utilities, which must in many states include an increasing proportion of renewables in the electricity they sell to consumers. For many U.S. environmentalists, energy from large-scale dams that divert rivers and flood vast territories is no more ecologically sound than the stuff that comes from hydrocarbons. And competitors in the burgeoning wind and solar industries would love nothing more than to keep Hydro-Québec out of their market."
The CBC reports, "Quebec Premier Jean Charest promoted his province's green hydro power. 'I'm chief salesman for Quebec and Quebec is hydro,' Charest told CBC News."
The Telegraph-Journal reported that, "Both (Nova Scotia premier Shawn) Graham and Quebec Premier Jean Charest touched on the pending sale of the bulk of NB Power's generating assets to Hydro-Québec during the high-level meeting, which received the endorsement of Maine Gov. John Baldacci earlier that day."
The Canwest News Service report is at http://news.globaltv.com/world/story.html?id=2593895.
Previous campaign blogs on this meeting are at http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=2926 and http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=2918.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Premiers happy after U.S. climate change meet
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/
Premiers+happy+after+climate+change+meet/2588518/story.html
===========================
4. 'Buy America deal should be subject of public hearings', says the Toronto Star
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 8:31 AM
The Toronto Star editorial board writes today that, "The 'Buy America' deal between Ottawa and Washington is either 'a very, very important step forward' (Prime Minister Stephen Harper), or 'a bad deal' (Maude Barlow, chairperson of the Council of Canadians)..."
"Behind these statements are more than just differences of opinion based on the same information. The various governments championing the deal and the interest groups opposed to it cannot even agree on the facts."
"On the Star's opinion page last Friday, Scott Sinclair of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives wrote that 'Canadian businesses will get to compete for no more than $4 billion to $5 billion (U.S.) worth of projects,' whereas American suppliers will have access to $25 billion (Canadian) in procurement on this side of the border."
"Federal Trade Minister Peter Van Loan says such figures are 'highly speculative.' He believes the deal is balanced but there are so many potential contracts and sub-contracts involved that 'anybody who pretends to know (the outcome) is pretending to know the impossible.' Maybe so. But the principles involved in this deal are too important and the long-range implications too enormous to accept governmental assurances at face value."
The Toronto Star, the largest circulation newspaper in the country, concludes, "The deal ought to be the subject of public hearings, in both Parliament and the provincial legislatures."
The full editorial is at http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editoria ... s-scrutiny.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"Buy America" deal requires scrutiny
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
768482--buy-america-deal-requires-scrutiny
Published On Sun Feb 21 2010
The "Buy America" deal between Ottawa and Washington is either "a very, very important step forward" (Prime Minister Stephen Harper), or "a bad deal" (Maude Barlow, chairperson of the Council of Canadians), or "great news for Ontario's economy" (Ontario Trade Minister Sandra Pupatello), or "too little, too late" (Liberal trade critic Scott Brison), or "so unbalanced and asymmetrical as to be shocking" (Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario Federation of Labour).
Take your pick.
Behind these statements are more than just differences of opinion based on the same information. The various governments championing the deal and the interest groups opposed to it cannot even agree on the facts.
The deal purports to exempt Canadian manufacturers from Buy America clauses in U.S. infrastructure spending that require state and local governments to use only domestic suppliers. In turn, provincial and municipal governments in Canada are supposed to provide reciprocal access to American suppliers in their procurements.
But the 54-page deal is jammed with exceptions and conditions, framed in dense legalese. (A small sample: "Except as specified otherwise in this appendix, procurement in terms of U.S. coverage does not include non-contractual agreements or any form of government assistance, including cooperative agreements, grants, loans, equity infusions, guarantees, fiscal incentives and governmental provision of goods and services to persons or governmental authorities not specifically
covered under U.S. annexes to this agreement.")
After wading through all that, critics of the deal have come to the conclusion that we are being shafted. On the Star's opinion page last Friday, Scott Sinclair of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives wrote that "Canadian businesses will get to compete for no more than $4 billion to $5 billion (U.S.) worth of projects," whereas American suppliers will have access to $25 billion (Canadian) in procurement on this side of the border.
MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
768482--buy-america-deal-requires-scrutiny
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Letter: Chaloner: Approach new trade deal with extreme caution
http://news.guelphmercury.com/article/598675
Feb 18.10
Re: Buy American Exemption Makes Canada A Part Of The Problem — Feb. 10
Todd Hirsch’s article on the Buy American campaign encourages our support for it despite “injustices sometimes associated with international trade, such as the lack of labour laws in developing countries and the pillaging of natural resources in places with corrupt or naïve governments.” But Council of Canadians chair Maude Barlow adds: “This is the first bad step in a perfect storm of so-called trade agreements, which are designed to open up local procurement that was left out of NAFTA.” There is absolutely no need to put health care, water and other public services on the chopping block.
Barlow is urging premiers in an open letter to walk away from the Stephen Harper government’s procurement deal with the United States and to hold countrywide consultations on the impacts of including sub-national governments in the World Trade Organization (WTO). News today that the European Union wants to go even further with the potential Canada-EU trade pact than the Buy American proposal by permanently including cities, water and electricity utilities makes this appeal for caution all the more significant.
Including the provinces, territories and their agencies in the WTO government procurement agreement will ban any future local content requirements in government purchasing, such as the local content quotas for new renewable projects that Ontario has included in its Green Energy Act.
“It is the industrial and manufacturing equivalent of a 2,500-mile-diet at a time when governments around the world are seeing the benefits of going local,” says Barlow. “We do not advocate for protectionism. Rather, we support a smart economic policy that signing on to the WTO excludes as an option for Canadians.”
Norah Chaloner, co-chair, Guelph chapter, Council of Canadians
================
5. Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series: Dr. Walter Dorn on Canada and peacekeeping
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=4144&utm_sou ... m_campaign
=Feed%3A+ceasefire%2FycPl+%28Ceasefire.ca%29
Feb. 20.10
On 11 February 2010, the Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series hosted Dr. Walter Dorn in conversation with Gloria Galloway of the Globe and Mail on the topic of Canada’s future as a UN peacekeeper. Dr. Dorn, a professor at the Canadian Forces College, strongly advocated a return to Canada’s proud tradition as a strong supporter of and contributor to UN peacekeeping.
During his presentation and the question period that followed, Dr. Dorn addressed a number of key themes surrounding this issue. For Canada to become a peacekeeper once again, he argued, it must dispel two contradictory myths. Firstly, that Canada is still a peacekeeping nation and, secondly, that it never was a peacekeeping nation. With respect to the former, Canada has lost its title as a peacekeeping nation as it now contributes only 55 military peacekeepers, 0.06 percent of the total number, to UN missions around the world. With respect to the latter, Dr. Dorn invoked the history of Canada’s involvement in peacekeeping. Although Canada has been involved in a number of combat missions, it was one of the chief architects of, and was long one of the key contributors to, UN peacekeeping missions.
The Obama administration has played a major role in rejuvenating the future of peacekeeping. Obama’s attitude towards the UN differs markedly from that of his predecessor, George W. Bush, whose administration was highly critical of and antagonistic towards the UN. Obama’s move to make the UN ambassadorship a cabinet position and resumption of dues payments indicate a more positive attitude towards the UN.
Canada’s withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2011 will allow it to focus on a new international role as a peacekeeper. Already, the Canadian Forces are playing a major role in aiding Haiti’s recovery from the disastrous January 2010 earthquake. Will the Canadian Forces once again don the blue beret in Haiti and other places? Dorn sees a bright future for Canada and its contribution to world peace. The question is whether Canadians and the Canadian government are willing to take the first step.
The full presentation and the question period that followed it can be watched on CPAC.
Photo by Rideau Institute
ShareThis
Canadian Forces College, CPAC, Dr. Walter Dorn, Gloria Galloway, Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series, UN peacekeeping
========================
6. Clinton criticized for dodging question on Israel nukes
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspxid=119 ... id=3510203
Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:53:34 GMT
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is criticized for dodging a question on Israel's nuclear arsenal during a "town hall" meeting at a Jeddah college.
Mariyam Alavi, a Saudi student, asked Clinton last Tuesday about Washington's stance on the existence of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
"I did not get a straight answer," Alavi said in a letter published in Arab News, AFP reported.
"My question was simple and direct enough," she wrote, but Clinton's response "was very unsatisfying."
The 12th grader at the International Indian School in Jeddah, who attended the meeting at the elite Dar al-Hekma College, noted that the US top diplomat only detailed Iran's nuclear program, without mentioning Israel.
If the Americans "so vehemently oppose Iran's nuclear program," she had asked, "then why isn't the US asking Israel to give up their nuclear weapons?"
The student has questioned Washington's double standard toward Iran's nuclear program and accused Washington of hypocrisy.
"Clinton said that the United States, under the able leadership of President Barack Obama, was trying to repair and strengthen its ties with the Muslim world," Alavi said.
"It is high time she realized it couldn't be done without answering the questions uppermost in the minds of the Middle East people," she added.
MORE:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspxid=119 ... id=3510203
==========================
7. Climate: Eight Convenient Truths
http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Climate-+Eight+Convenient+Truths
By Amory B. Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute
(Editor’s note: this piece originally appeared in Roll Call on Nov. 9, 2009, in a slightly different form.)
In his remarks at the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen in December, President Obama did say (to my delight) that climate solutions advance both prosperity and security, but he hadn’t time to rebut in detail the “sign error” — the widespread fallacy that climate solutions are intrinsically an economic burden.
Now that the post-Copenhagen dust has settled and it’s time to refocus on what we should be doing and get back to work, here are eight convenient truths to consider and share about climate and energy.
1. For all world citizens who want a richer, fairer, cooler, and safer world, here’s a heretical suggestion: whether you want to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions should
not depend on your view about the reality and risk of climate change.
More importantly, your opinions about climate science shouldn’t change what you should do about energy. Whether you care most about national security, or jobs and prosperity, or climate and environment, exactly the same energy actions make sense and make money regardless.
Thus, if we focus on outcomes, not motives, we can build a wide and rapid consensus on what to do, even if we differ about why to do it.
MORE: http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Climate-+Eight+Convenient+Truths
Amory B. Lovins is Cofounder, Chairman, and Chief Scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute.
=========================
8. If you think nuclear power is safe and clean (like the President does), think again (like the President should)!
http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
From: "Ace Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:31 AM
Dear Readers,
President Obama thinks he can jumpstart a new generation of safe and clean nuclear power plants.
Nuclear power is neither safe nor clean, nor cheap, nor useful, nor vital, nor good for America. And no "new" nuclear power plant design will make nuclear power any of these things.
There are "safe, clean" ways to obtain electrical energy for everybody. Obama paid them lip service in his State of the Union speech last month. But he is actually giving billions of dollars to nuclear power -- a gift from each of us, whether we like it or not. Many of us don't like it, and the rest of us might want to understand why not.
Obama's nuclear funding bill is being presented as a jobs program, but since nuclear-related construction jobs average higher salaries than many other jobs (including photovoltaic or wind turbine installation jobs -- which still pay pretty well), you get fewer jobs created for every dollar invested.
And more of the money goes out of the country, too. Many major parts of any new reactor, including many of the largest steel forged pieces and a lot of the electronic control hardware, will be made overseas, in dozens of different countries. Nuclear power plants are NOT "Made In America."
MORE: http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
=======================
9. U.S. turns to Sweden as model in nuclear waste storage
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 10:10 PM
Background:
This author fails to note that one reason for Sweden's willingness to consider a geologic repository for nuclear waste is the fact that Sweden decided long ago to phase out of nuclear power.
Now that the Swedish government is trying to back out of their commitment to a nuclear phase-out, public opposition to the continued production of nuclear wastes may turn Swedes against the repository project also.
It is ironic that just last month, the highly respected Swedish newspaper Ny Teknik reported that the Nuclear Waste Council of Sweden now questions the idea of burying the waste in an irretrievable fashion, and also questions some of the most basic technical assumptions about the integrity of the buried waste.
The article, in Swedish (Feb. 13 2010) is here:
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/karnkraft/
article726480.ece
A rough English translation appears below.
Gordon Edwards.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
U.S. turns to Sweden as model in nuclear waste storage
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/21/nation/
la-na-nuclear-waste21-2010feb21
While progress here has lagged, the Scandinavian country has successfully chosen a site for a geological repository after including citizens and local government in the discussion.
By Margot Roosevelt, L.A. Times, February 21, 2010
If the United States is at a loss over what to do about nuclear waste, it may be time to check out the Swedish model.
A symposium at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Diego last week highlighted the Swedish power industry in gaining public support for a geological repository for high-level radioactive waste.
The Scandinavian success comes in stark contrast to efforts in the U.S., where spent nuclear fuel rods have remained for decades in temporary storage at power plants around the country. Meanwhile, Congress has debated where to bury them, decided on a repository under Yucca Mountain in Nevada, and then changed its mind.
The Obama administration, mindful of the fierce resistance of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), has opposed Yucca and, in the 2011 budget, slashed all funding for the project, which is led by the Department of Energy.
Also, President Obama has called for "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear plants" and has budgeted $36 billion in loan guarantees for nuclear power.
Like the U.S., Sweden, which gets 50% of its electricity from nuclear plants, has faced opposition in its three-decade quest to find a suitable long-term burial site. Protests halted studies at several sites.
And the Swedes had a high barrier to overcome: Under Swedish law, any municipality can veto a repository within its borders.
The key, according to Claes Thegerstrom, chief executive of Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., was a methodical, deliberate process, with a dash of human psychological insight.
MORE:
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/21/nation/
la-na-nuclear-waste21-2010feb21
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Rough Translation of Ny Tektik article, Feb 13 2010:
The Nuclear Waste Council (Kärnavfallsrådet) says: The waste must be retrievable Sweden has to start discussing whether nuclear fuel should be reused (reprocessed) – even if that is controversial. So says the nuclear waste council in a recent report.
The council also requires new studies about whether the copper capsules planned to encase the waste are safe and wants to establish more stringent requirements for the bentonite clay surrounding the capsules.
Yesterday, Thursday, another hot nuclear issue landed on the desk of Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren (of the Center Party).
The advisory body of the government, the nuclear waste council, handed over its overview of the state of knowledge concerning the final storage of spent fuel from the nuclear reactors of the country.
In other countries, possibilities to reprocess finally stored spent fuel for use in nuclear power plants of future generations, are now being discussed.
And the council is of the opinion that here in Sweden the question should also now be raised whether it should be possible to ”dig up” the waste when it has been buried once and for all.
”Internationally the issue about retrievability has become more and more a current matter and has a high status on the agenda of the national nuclear waste programs in many countries” writes the council.
Two main issues have led to this; the council points out: (1) the climate debate and (2) new reactor technology.
What is being discussed is how the spent fuel shall be treated before it is sealed away (closed) for the future -- that is, before it has been put down and buried in the bedrock.
Within a year SKB, Svensk Kärnbränslehantering (the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company), is expected to deliver an application to the government for a final repository for spent fuel some 500 metres deep in the bedrock locatedin the Östhammar commune, close to the Forsmark nuclear power plant (at the coast, some 100 kms north of Stockholm).
Three barriers are intended to hinder the dangerous radio-active waste from leaking out from the final repository: copper capsules, bentonite clay and the bedrock itself, in which the waste has been put down.
Ny Teknik has earlier reported about new research results that question the security of the planned Swedish final repository method, namely the KBS-3 method. The copper capsules are not safe since, according to scientists at KTH in Stockholm (Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan = the Royal Technical Highschool) there are previously unrecognized risks for corrosion.
The corrosion-scientist Peter Szakalos and his master teacher Gunnar Hultquist have for a long time been critical of SKB’s concept of thin copper capsules.
• The thin copper capsules that Svensk Kärnbränslehantering (SKB) is going to use can in a worst case scenario collapse within a thousand years, he says.
• “Above all it is the durability of the copper capsules in clean, oxygen free water, that is being questioned”, states the nuclear waste council and requires that SKB must carry out new research concerning the durability of the copper capsules.
“The results of the KTH-group (the Royal Technical Highschool) may well be correct but there are uncertainties that have to be cleared up”, writes the council.
The council is also of the opinion that SKB requirements on the quality of the bentonite clay that is supposed to function as a buffer around the capsules, and that will be bought from suppliers of bentonite, are inadequate -- the quality is too low.
The suppliers must be given clearer quality specifications, says the nuclear waste council.
========================
10. Energy and Capital's Weekend Edition
http://email.angelnexus.com/hostedemail ... 0174386&ch
=078F28D41DEA4FCBB1D76D343AB01342
By Keith Kohl | Saturday, February 20th, 2010
You may hesitate to call it a revival, or even a renaissance...
But the nuclear industry is getting a boost, no matter how you slice it.
This week, President Obama said the government will guarantee loans for new nuclear plants — nearly three decades since U.S. soil last saw construction of a nuclear plant.
Hailed for its ability to wean us off of a carbon-fueled future and despised for its heavy stigma, nuclear energy is getting the boost it needs. The new move will give an $8.3 billion loan to the Southern Company (NYSE: SO) and its partners to help build two nuclear reactors in Georgia with projected completion in six to seven years.
It should be glaringly obvious by now that no single energy source will be a panacea for our looming energy crisis. But it is a step in the right direction...
= = = = =
Breakthroughs nowhere near this big have paid investors over 10x gains
Our resident biotech expert just came across a tiny company that can make the human immune system 1000 times more effective against dozens of deadly diseases -- including the major cancers: Prostate, lung, breast, cervical, and more...
Here's how their revolutionary "cell-shock" technology could hand you as much as 1000 times your money as it saves tens of millions worldwide.
So what else has been happening this week?
· The fate of hydraulic fracturing hangs in the balance as the House Energy and Commerce Committee started an investigation to determine the potential impacts on both the environment and human health.
· As you know, shale gas has exploded over the last several years — thanks mostly to advances made in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Federal regulations on "hydro-fracking" could have serious repercussions for our domestic gas production.
· The supermajors are finally getting their act together. ConocoPhillips announced it had replaced 141% of its reserves in 2009. Exxon released similar news, increasing the company's reserves by 133% last year.
· Petroleo Brasilerio, Brazil's state-controlled oil company, will issue $75 billion of shares in the world's largest stock sale. Although the company has yet to set a date for the sale, the company is expecting to raise nearly $50 billion in cash from investors.
· Meanwhile, Mexico is pinning its hopes and dreams on a new oilfield discovered in the south of the Gulf of Mexico. Developing this new field could take up to 2 years, and could potentially add another 150,000 barrels to the country's daily oil production.
· Mexico's Cantarell field is expected to pump out 2.3 million barrels per day in 2010. This 11.6% projected decline over 2009's production has situated the Mexican government between a rock and a hard place, especially after considering that approximately 40% of government revenue comes from the country's oil production.
· With Mexico's oil production spiraling downward, things are just starting to heat up for Canada. Oil and gas drilling rights in Alberta brought in $106 million this month — more than 12 times the amount of 2009's February land sale. We're chalking up Alberta's success to the Cardium formation, where companies are starting to utilize horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques. I've covered the Cardium oil formation for readers in the past, which is catching up to Saskatchewan's famous Bakken formation as the hottest oil play in North America.
Enjoy your weekend,
Keith Kohl
P.S. In case you missed our top stories from this week's Energy and Capital or our sister publications, I've included them below.
A Bakken Mistake Worth Millions: The Hottest Oil Play in the U.S. that Fooled Even the Experts
Energy and Capital readers have known about the Bakken formation for years, yet even they were surprised when one tiny error made their favorite oil stocks explode higher. Of course, the ride isn't over for us... because the Bakken's second round of profits has just begun.
Nuclear Energy's Second Wind: How to Harness Energy's New Picks and Shovels
Editor Nick Hodge takes the upcoming nuclear bull by the horns, showing investors which sectors are going to rake in the gains.
The Death of Death: One Overlooked American Biotech Making Huge Strides
It's a fact: disease is the #1 cause of death in the world. By a long shot. Energy and Capital reports: One tiny biotech company is developing new vaccines to fight the quiet killer that claims hundreds of thousands of lives each year. Learn how these guys can make you a small fortune on their latest breakthrough.
The Brewing Pension Funding Crisis: When this Train Arrives, It'll Run Us Over
Wealth Daily Editor Steve Christ sheds some light the crisis brewing in municipal pensions, which is leading us toward another financial disaster.
China, Denmark, and Renewable Energy: Two Countries Team Up after COP-15
International Editor Sam Hopkins explains why China and Denmark are teaming up to establish a clean energy research center. Find out how this will impact China's long-term energy efficiency goals.
Investing in Land Stocks: 6 Land Stocks to Safeguard your Portfolio
Wealth Daily Editor Luke Burgess touches on a commodity more important than gold or oil: land. Luke shows you what to look for when investing in land stocks... and gives you a headstart in your research.
The Single Uranium Stock to Buy Right Now: Uranium on the Rise as Obama Goes Nuclear
Are you ready for the nuclear revival? Wealth Daily Publisher Brian Hicks knows the next bull market in nuclear energy is right around the corner. In his latest musings, Brian offers one uranium company in a perfect position to make his readers a small fortune over the next six months.
DNA Vaccine Investments: This Bull Market is Just Heating Up
Editor Steve Christ weighs in on the next big thing in the biotech industry. Here's a hint: this third generation of new vaccines could make early investors a fortune over the long haul...
==========================
11. Impending Explosion: U.S. Intensifies Threats To Russia And Iran
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17709
By Rick Rozoff Global Research, February 19, 2010 Stop NATO - 2010-02-18
Washington and its NATO allies launched two of the three major wars in the world over the past eleven years in March against Yugoslavia in 1999 and against Iraq in 2003. The war drums are being pounded anew and the world may be headed for a catastrophe far worse than those in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq.
The United States, separately and through the military bloc it controls, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is accelerating military deployments and provocations throughout Eurasia and the Middle East.
Embroiled with fellow NATO members in the largest-scale military offensive of the joint war in Afghanistan launched eight years ago last October and well on the way to both extending and replicating the Afghan aggression in the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula [1], Washington and its allies are also taunting and threatening Russia as well as surrounding Iran with military forces and hardware preparatory to a potential attack on that nation.
MORE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17709
=======================
12. Navy dock in danger of becoming a 'nuclear dumping ground.'
The Ministry of Defence has put forward plans to use the Devonport dockyard in Plymouth as a centre for dismantling radioactive submarines. London Guardian, United Kingdom.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/fe ... ing-ground
Compilation:
1. Carbon Foot Printing Symposium – March 02.10
2. All Out March 3rd – Tell RBC Shareholders: Stop bankrolling tar sands!
3. Outcomes of premiers, governors meeting in Washington
4. Buy America deal should be subject of public hearings', says the Toronto Star
5. Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series: Dr. Walter Dorn on Canada and peacekeeping
6. Clinton criticized for dodging question on Israel nukes
7. Climate: Eight Convenient Truths
8. If you think nuclear power is safe and clean (like the President does), think again (like the President should)!
9. U.S. turns to Sweden as model in nuclear waste storage
10. Energy and Capital's Weekend Edition
11. Impending Explosion: U.S. Intensifies Threats To Russia And Iran
12. Navy dock in danger of becoming a 'nuclear dumping ground.'
=======================
1. Carbon Foot Printing Symposium – March 02.10
http://www.seda.sk.ca/2010-carbon-footprint-info.html
A number of non-governmental, private and public partners are hosting the Carbon Footprint Symposium in Saskatoon at the Sheraton Cavalier on March 2, 2010. Focus on providing insight to SME’s with regard to how they may be impacted by emerging changes towards a greener economy or global convergence on emissions limits. Registration is only $100 (includes GST).
Registration deadline is February 22, 2010.
=====================
2. All Out March 3rd – Tell RBC Shareholders: Stop bankrolling tar sands!
Check out the call to action below. There will be a rally at the Royal Bank AGM, on March 3rd in Toronto. Details below.
There are solidarity actions happening all across the country and there may be one near you that you can join!
If you would like more information, want to get involved in any other way, or want to organize your own solidarity action, contact Dave Vasey dvasey@ran.org
Or you can email me at my Rainforest Action Network address: maryam@ran.org
Maryam Adrangi
Administration Assistant- Ontario, Quebec, Nunavut Regional Office
Solidarity Actions near you:
Montreal: Contact Cam at holditdownproductions@gmail.com
Ottawa: Contact Iain at iain.brannigan@pidssa.ca
Kingston: Contact Marie at marie.bencze@gmail.com
Lindsay: Contact Ben at bprowse@flemingc.on.ca
London: Contact Toban black2@uwo.ca
Winnipeg: Contact Alon at radishoak@resist.ca
Saskatoon: Contact Jeh at jeh.custerra@gmail.com
Calgary: Contact Alex at adoukas@gmail.com
Edmonton: Contact Keely at kkidner@ualberta.ca
Victoria: Contact Caitlyn at caitlyn.vernon@gmail.com
Vancover: Contact Brennan at brennanwauters@gmail.com
All Out March 3rd – Tell RBC Shareholders: Stop bankrolling tar sands!
Join us for a morning of creative, non-violent direct action culminating in a rally outside the Metro Center at 2 pm to show solidarity with First Nations representatives.
When: morning actions, rally @ 2pm, March 3, 2010
Where: Metro Center, Toronto
On March 3rd, the Royal Bank of Canada will hold its annual general meeting of shareholders’ at the Toronto Metro Convention Center. It’s the one time every year that the bank’s top executives, board and other decision makers gather in the same place to hear from shareholders. This year, we want them to hear from you!
Since 2007 RBC has backed more than $16.9 billion (USD) in loans to companies operating in the tar sands—more than any other bank. Expansion of the tar sands is trampling the rights of Indigenous peoples, destroying globally significant ecosystems, and significantly increasing Canada’s carbon emissions.
Representatives from several First Nations impacted by tar sands expansion will attend the meeting to demand that RBC recognize the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent for Indigenous communities, and suspend its financial support for tar sands expansion.
Take Action in your area - If you are interested in organizing an action before or at RBC’s AGM, please contact Eriel Deranger eriel@ran.org or Dave Vasey dvasey@ran.org
Check out the Facebook event for more info and updates http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?ei ... 834&ref=ts
=======================
3. Outcomes of premiers, governors meeting in Washington
From: Brent Patterson
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 10:42 AM
Seven Canadian premiers met with the National Governors Association this past weekend in Washington, DC. They discussed the tar sands, climate change, trade, country of origin labelling, and hydro exports.
TAR SANDS
The Canwest News Service reports that, "Minnesota (Governor) Tim Pawlenty, stressed the importance of Canadian crude oil to his state’s economy. Pawlenty, touted as a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2012, said it would be 'very ill-advised' for the U.S. to impose any sort of barriers to Canadian oil."
"That was music to the ears of western premiers who worry U.S. state and federal lawmakers will pursue environmental and trade measures to curb Canadian petroleum exports."
“'I’ve heard Gov. (Brian) Schweitzer (of Montana) actually take to task some of those who refer to our energy exports as ‘dirty Canadian oil’ on this side of the border," (Saskatchewan premier Brad) Wall said. 'It’s been a U.S. governor who’s done that, because he has a great understanding of the fact that we’re working hard to reduce the environmental footprint around our oil production, and we are a safe, reliable source of energy for (the) economy of the U.S.'”
"The meeting 'was a huge step forward,' said New Brunswick Premier Shawn Graham, whose province supplies about 60 per cent of refined petroleum products into the Northeastern U.S. states. 'Security of supply of energy is critical for the U.S. economy to recover.'”
CLIMATE CHANGE
"Of particular concern to Wall are potential moves by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions that could prompt punishing trade barriers on Canadian exports of oil, and other carbon-rich products. EPA administrator Lisa Jackson appeared to understand that concern, Wall said, and, he was heartened to hear governors say how important Canadian oil imports are to them — particularly in states like Utah, Montana and Minnesota, where jobs rely on refining Canadian oil."
"Wall may have also convinced Jackson to follow several U.S. senators’ footsteps and visit the carbon capture and sequestration project near Weyburn, Saskatchewan, where 17 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from a coal-gasification plant in North Dakota have now been captured and stored underground."
"As Manitoba premier, (Ambassador Gary) Doer negotiated the Western Climate Initiative with several states that set regional greenhouse gas emissions goals. Deals struck between some provinces and states on tailpipe emissions are now being used as a model for national standards planned by Ottawa and Washington."
TRADE
"The premiers’ meeting with the governors followed two high-level meetings on Friday with senior White House officials, including Larry Summers, economic czar, and Jackson. Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said he pressed U.S. leaders about the depth of protectionist sentiment caused by the recent recession. 'I have been reassured that, while it always has some seductive appeal, there is a new awareness...that we have to guard against protectionism and keep our trade linkages strong.'"
"Premiers now hope Canada will get a permanent exemption from future Buy American measures. 'I think there is a good possibility they (will) recognize the need for a preferential treatment for Canada,' said Manitoba Premier Greg Selinger. 'I don’t think any of what they have tried to do...was intended to side-swipe Canada. But now we have to be there so they think about us when they make these kinds of decisions.'”
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELLING
"The premiers also met Sunday with U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to raise ongoing complaints over country-of-origin labelling rules that Canada says unfairly damage exports of meat and food products to the United States. The law has sharply reduced Canadian hog and cattle exports to the U.S. Some Canadian producers feel the rules are a result of effective lobbying by select U.S. producers attempting to protect their own livelihood, rather than concerns about the meat’s safety. According to Wall, Vilsack remains committed to enforcing the rules but expressed openness to ways of mitigating its impact on Canada."
HYDRO EXPORTS/ SALE OF NB POWER
The Globe and Mail adds that, "(Governor Pawlenty's) endorsement of Canadian hydro power underscored Minnesota's dependence on access to electricity generated by large dams in Manitoba. But it served to buttress the main message that Quebec Premier Jean Charest strived to get across at the meeting. Mr. Charest wants federal and state authorities to officially recognize Hydro-Québec's power as 'renewable' energy, putting it on equal footing with electricity from wind, solar or micro-scale hydro projects. That recognition would make it easier for Quebec to negotiate lucrative pricing on long-term sales contracts with U.S. utilities, which must in many states include an increasing proportion of renewables in the electricity they sell to consumers. For many U.S. environmentalists, energy from large-scale dams that divert rivers and flood vast territories is no more ecologically sound than the stuff that comes from hydrocarbons. And competitors in the burgeoning wind and solar industries would love nothing more than to keep Hydro-Québec out of their market."
The CBC reports, "Quebec Premier Jean Charest promoted his province's green hydro power. 'I'm chief salesman for Quebec and Quebec is hydro,' Charest told CBC News."
The Telegraph-Journal reported that, "Both (Nova Scotia premier Shawn) Graham and Quebec Premier Jean Charest touched on the pending sale of the bulk of NB Power's generating assets to Hydro-Québec during the high-level meeting, which received the endorsement of Maine Gov. John Baldacci earlier that day."
The Canwest News Service report is at http://news.globaltv.com/world/story.html?id=2593895.
Previous campaign blogs on this meeting are at http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=2926 and http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=2918.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Premiers happy after U.S. climate change meet
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/
Premiers+happy+after+climate+change+meet/2588518/story.html
===========================
4. 'Buy America deal should be subject of public hearings', says the Toronto Star
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 8:31 AM
The Toronto Star editorial board writes today that, "The 'Buy America' deal between Ottawa and Washington is either 'a very, very important step forward' (Prime Minister Stephen Harper), or 'a bad deal' (Maude Barlow, chairperson of the Council of Canadians)..."
"Behind these statements are more than just differences of opinion based on the same information. The various governments championing the deal and the interest groups opposed to it cannot even agree on the facts."
"On the Star's opinion page last Friday, Scott Sinclair of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives wrote that 'Canadian businesses will get to compete for no more than $4 billion to $5 billion (U.S.) worth of projects,' whereas American suppliers will have access to $25 billion (Canadian) in procurement on this side of the border."
"Federal Trade Minister Peter Van Loan says such figures are 'highly speculative.' He believes the deal is balanced but there are so many potential contracts and sub-contracts involved that 'anybody who pretends to know (the outcome) is pretending to know the impossible.' Maybe so. But the principles involved in this deal are too important and the long-range implications too enormous to accept governmental assurances at face value."
The Toronto Star, the largest circulation newspaper in the country, concludes, "The deal ought to be the subject of public hearings, in both Parliament and the provincial legislatures."
The full editorial is at http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editoria ... s-scrutiny.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"Buy America" deal requires scrutiny
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
768482--buy-america-deal-requires-scrutiny
Published On Sun Feb 21 2010
The "Buy America" deal between Ottawa and Washington is either "a very, very important step forward" (Prime Minister Stephen Harper), or "a bad deal" (Maude Barlow, chairperson of the Council of Canadians), or "great news for Ontario's economy" (Ontario Trade Minister Sandra Pupatello), or "too little, too late" (Liberal trade critic Scott Brison), or "so unbalanced and asymmetrical as to be shocking" (Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario Federation of Labour).
Take your pick.
Behind these statements are more than just differences of opinion based on the same information. The various governments championing the deal and the interest groups opposed to it cannot even agree on the facts.
The deal purports to exempt Canadian manufacturers from Buy America clauses in U.S. infrastructure spending that require state and local governments to use only domestic suppliers. In turn, provincial and municipal governments in Canada are supposed to provide reciprocal access to American suppliers in their procurements.
But the 54-page deal is jammed with exceptions and conditions, framed in dense legalese. (A small sample: "Except as specified otherwise in this appendix, procurement in terms of U.S. coverage does not include non-contractual agreements or any form of government assistance, including cooperative agreements, grants, loans, equity infusions, guarantees, fiscal incentives and governmental provision of goods and services to persons or governmental authorities not specifically
covered under U.S. annexes to this agreement.")
After wading through all that, critics of the deal have come to the conclusion that we are being shafted. On the Star's opinion page last Friday, Scott Sinclair of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives wrote that "Canadian businesses will get to compete for no more than $4 billion to $5 billion (U.S.) worth of projects," whereas American suppliers will have access to $25 billion (Canadian) in procurement on this side of the border.
MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/
768482--buy-america-deal-requires-scrutiny
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Letter: Chaloner: Approach new trade deal with extreme caution
http://news.guelphmercury.com/article/598675
Feb 18.10
Re: Buy American Exemption Makes Canada A Part Of The Problem — Feb. 10
Todd Hirsch’s article on the Buy American campaign encourages our support for it despite “injustices sometimes associated with international trade, such as the lack of labour laws in developing countries and the pillaging of natural resources in places with corrupt or naïve governments.” But Council of Canadians chair Maude Barlow adds: “This is the first bad step in a perfect storm of so-called trade agreements, which are designed to open up local procurement that was left out of NAFTA.” There is absolutely no need to put health care, water and other public services on the chopping block.
Barlow is urging premiers in an open letter to walk away from the Stephen Harper government’s procurement deal with the United States and to hold countrywide consultations on the impacts of including sub-national governments in the World Trade Organization (WTO). News today that the European Union wants to go even further with the potential Canada-EU trade pact than the Buy American proposal by permanently including cities, water and electricity utilities makes this appeal for caution all the more significant.
Including the provinces, territories and their agencies in the WTO government procurement agreement will ban any future local content requirements in government purchasing, such as the local content quotas for new renewable projects that Ontario has included in its Green Energy Act.
“It is the industrial and manufacturing equivalent of a 2,500-mile-diet at a time when governments around the world are seeing the benefits of going local,” says Barlow. “We do not advocate for protectionism. Rather, we support a smart economic policy that signing on to the WTO excludes as an option for Canadians.”
Norah Chaloner, co-chair, Guelph chapter, Council of Canadians
================
5. Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series: Dr. Walter Dorn on Canada and peacekeeping
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=4144&utm_sou ... m_campaign
=Feed%3A+ceasefire%2FycPl+%28Ceasefire.ca%29
Feb. 20.10
On 11 February 2010, the Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series hosted Dr. Walter Dorn in conversation with Gloria Galloway of the Globe and Mail on the topic of Canada’s future as a UN peacekeeper. Dr. Dorn, a professor at the Canadian Forces College, strongly advocated a return to Canada’s proud tradition as a strong supporter of and contributor to UN peacekeeping.
During his presentation and the question period that followed, Dr. Dorn addressed a number of key themes surrounding this issue. For Canada to become a peacekeeper once again, he argued, it must dispel two contradictory myths. Firstly, that Canada is still a peacekeeping nation and, secondly, that it never was a peacekeeping nation. With respect to the former, Canada has lost its title as a peacekeeping nation as it now contributes only 55 military peacekeepers, 0.06 percent of the total number, to UN missions around the world. With respect to the latter, Dr. Dorn invoked the history of Canada’s involvement in peacekeeping. Although Canada has been involved in a number of combat missions, it was one of the chief architects of, and was long one of the key contributors to, UN peacekeeping missions.
The Obama administration has played a major role in rejuvenating the future of peacekeeping. Obama’s attitude towards the UN differs markedly from that of his predecessor, George W. Bush, whose administration was highly critical of and antagonistic towards the UN. Obama’s move to make the UN ambassadorship a cabinet position and resumption of dues payments indicate a more positive attitude towards the UN.
Canada’s withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2011 will allow it to focus on a new international role as a peacekeeper. Already, the Canadian Forces are playing a major role in aiding Haiti’s recovery from the disastrous January 2010 earthquake. Will the Canadian Forces once again don the blue beret in Haiti and other places? Dorn sees a bright future for Canada and its contribution to world peace. The question is whether Canadians and the Canadian government are willing to take the first step.
The full presentation and the question period that followed it can be watched on CPAC.
Photo by Rideau Institute
ShareThis
Canadian Forces College, CPAC, Dr. Walter Dorn, Gloria Galloway, Ottawa Outfront Speaker Series, UN peacekeeping
========================
6. Clinton criticized for dodging question on Israel nukes
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspxid=119 ... id=3510203
Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:53:34 GMT
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is criticized for dodging a question on Israel's nuclear arsenal during a "town hall" meeting at a Jeddah college.
Mariyam Alavi, a Saudi student, asked Clinton last Tuesday about Washington's stance on the existence of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
"I did not get a straight answer," Alavi said in a letter published in Arab News, AFP reported.
"My question was simple and direct enough," she wrote, but Clinton's response "was very unsatisfying."
The 12th grader at the International Indian School in Jeddah, who attended the meeting at the elite Dar al-Hekma College, noted that the US top diplomat only detailed Iran's nuclear program, without mentioning Israel.
If the Americans "so vehemently oppose Iran's nuclear program," she had asked, "then why isn't the US asking Israel to give up their nuclear weapons?"
The student has questioned Washington's double standard toward Iran's nuclear program and accused Washington of hypocrisy.
"Clinton said that the United States, under the able leadership of President Barack Obama, was trying to repair and strengthen its ties with the Muslim world," Alavi said.
"It is high time she realized it couldn't be done without answering the questions uppermost in the minds of the Middle East people," she added.
MORE:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspxid=119 ... id=3510203
==========================
7. Climate: Eight Convenient Truths
http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Climate-+Eight+Convenient+Truths
By Amory B. Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute
(Editor’s note: this piece originally appeared in Roll Call on Nov. 9, 2009, in a slightly different form.)
In his remarks at the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen in December, President Obama did say (to my delight) that climate solutions advance both prosperity and security, but he hadn’t time to rebut in detail the “sign error” — the widespread fallacy that climate solutions are intrinsically an economic burden.
Now that the post-Copenhagen dust has settled and it’s time to refocus on what we should be doing and get back to work, here are eight convenient truths to consider and share about climate and energy.
1. For all world citizens who want a richer, fairer, cooler, and safer world, here’s a heretical suggestion: whether you want to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions should
not depend on your view about the reality and risk of climate change.
More importantly, your opinions about climate science shouldn’t change what you should do about energy. Whether you care most about national security, or jobs and prosperity, or climate and environment, exactly the same energy actions make sense and make money regardless.
Thus, if we focus on outcomes, not motives, we can build a wide and rapid consensus on what to do, even if we differ about why to do it.
MORE: http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Climate-+Eight+Convenient+Truths
Amory B. Lovins is Cofounder, Chairman, and Chief Scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute.
=========================
8. If you think nuclear power is safe and clean (like the President does), think again (like the President should)!
http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
From: "Ace Hoffman" <rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com>
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:31 AM
Dear Readers,
President Obama thinks he can jumpstart a new generation of safe and clean nuclear power plants.
Nuclear power is neither safe nor clean, nor cheap, nor useful, nor vital, nor good for America. And no "new" nuclear power plant design will make nuclear power any of these things.
There are "safe, clean" ways to obtain electrical energy for everybody. Obama paid them lip service in his State of the Union speech last month. But he is actually giving billions of dollars to nuclear power -- a gift from each of us, whether we like it or not. Many of us don't like it, and the rest of us might want to understand why not.
Obama's nuclear funding bill is being presented as a jobs program, but since nuclear-related construction jobs average higher salaries than many other jobs (including photovoltaic or wind turbine installation jobs -- which still pay pretty well), you get fewer jobs created for every dollar invested.
And more of the money goes out of the country, too. Many major parts of any new reactor, including many of the largest steel forged pieces and a lot of the electronic control hardware, will be made overseas, in dozens of different countries. Nuclear power plants are NOT "Made In America."
MORE: http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
=======================
9. U.S. turns to Sweden as model in nuclear waste storage
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 10:10 PM
Background:
This author fails to note that one reason for Sweden's willingness to consider a geologic repository for nuclear waste is the fact that Sweden decided long ago to phase out of nuclear power.
Now that the Swedish government is trying to back out of their commitment to a nuclear phase-out, public opposition to the continued production of nuclear wastes may turn Swedes against the repository project also.
It is ironic that just last month, the highly respected Swedish newspaper Ny Teknik reported that the Nuclear Waste Council of Sweden now questions the idea of burying the waste in an irretrievable fashion, and also questions some of the most basic technical assumptions about the integrity of the buried waste.
The article, in Swedish (Feb. 13 2010) is here:
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/karnkraft/
article726480.ece
A rough English translation appears below.
Gordon Edwards.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
U.S. turns to Sweden as model in nuclear waste storage
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/21/nation/
la-na-nuclear-waste21-2010feb21
While progress here has lagged, the Scandinavian country has successfully chosen a site for a geological repository after including citizens and local government in the discussion.
By Margot Roosevelt, L.A. Times, February 21, 2010
If the United States is at a loss over what to do about nuclear waste, it may be time to check out the Swedish model.
A symposium at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Diego last week highlighted the Swedish power industry in gaining public support for a geological repository for high-level radioactive waste.
The Scandinavian success comes in stark contrast to efforts in the U.S., where spent nuclear fuel rods have remained for decades in temporary storage at power plants around the country. Meanwhile, Congress has debated where to bury them, decided on a repository under Yucca Mountain in Nevada, and then changed its mind.
The Obama administration, mindful of the fierce resistance of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), has opposed Yucca and, in the 2011 budget, slashed all funding for the project, which is led by the Department of Energy.
Also, President Obama has called for "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear plants" and has budgeted $36 billion in loan guarantees for nuclear power.
Like the U.S., Sweden, which gets 50% of its electricity from nuclear plants, has faced opposition in its three-decade quest to find a suitable long-term burial site. Protests halted studies at several sites.
And the Swedes had a high barrier to overcome: Under Swedish law, any municipality can veto a repository within its borders.
The key, according to Claes Thegerstrom, chief executive of Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., was a methodical, deliberate process, with a dash of human psychological insight.
MORE:
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/21/nation/
la-na-nuclear-waste21-2010feb21
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Rough Translation of Ny Tektik article, Feb 13 2010:
The Nuclear Waste Council (Kärnavfallsrådet) says: The waste must be retrievable Sweden has to start discussing whether nuclear fuel should be reused (reprocessed) – even if that is controversial. So says the nuclear waste council in a recent report.
The council also requires new studies about whether the copper capsules planned to encase the waste are safe and wants to establish more stringent requirements for the bentonite clay surrounding the capsules.
Yesterday, Thursday, another hot nuclear issue landed on the desk of Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren (of the Center Party).
The advisory body of the government, the nuclear waste council, handed over its overview of the state of knowledge concerning the final storage of spent fuel from the nuclear reactors of the country.
In other countries, possibilities to reprocess finally stored spent fuel for use in nuclear power plants of future generations, are now being discussed.
And the council is of the opinion that here in Sweden the question should also now be raised whether it should be possible to ”dig up” the waste when it has been buried once and for all.
”Internationally the issue about retrievability has become more and more a current matter and has a high status on the agenda of the national nuclear waste programs in many countries” writes the council.
Two main issues have led to this; the council points out: (1) the climate debate and (2) new reactor technology.
What is being discussed is how the spent fuel shall be treated before it is sealed away (closed) for the future -- that is, before it has been put down and buried in the bedrock.
Within a year SKB, Svensk Kärnbränslehantering (the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company), is expected to deliver an application to the government for a final repository for spent fuel some 500 metres deep in the bedrock locatedin the Östhammar commune, close to the Forsmark nuclear power plant (at the coast, some 100 kms north of Stockholm).
Three barriers are intended to hinder the dangerous radio-active waste from leaking out from the final repository: copper capsules, bentonite clay and the bedrock itself, in which the waste has been put down.
Ny Teknik has earlier reported about new research results that question the security of the planned Swedish final repository method, namely the KBS-3 method. The copper capsules are not safe since, according to scientists at KTH in Stockholm (Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan = the Royal Technical Highschool) there are previously unrecognized risks for corrosion.
The corrosion-scientist Peter Szakalos and his master teacher Gunnar Hultquist have for a long time been critical of SKB’s concept of thin copper capsules.
• The thin copper capsules that Svensk Kärnbränslehantering (SKB) is going to use can in a worst case scenario collapse within a thousand years, he says.
• “Above all it is the durability of the copper capsules in clean, oxygen free water, that is being questioned”, states the nuclear waste council and requires that SKB must carry out new research concerning the durability of the copper capsules.
“The results of the KTH-group (the Royal Technical Highschool) may well be correct but there are uncertainties that have to be cleared up”, writes the council.
The council is also of the opinion that SKB requirements on the quality of the bentonite clay that is supposed to function as a buffer around the capsules, and that will be bought from suppliers of bentonite, are inadequate -- the quality is too low.
The suppliers must be given clearer quality specifications, says the nuclear waste council.
========================
10. Energy and Capital's Weekend Edition
http://email.angelnexus.com/hostedemail ... 0174386&ch
=078F28D41DEA4FCBB1D76D343AB01342
By Keith Kohl | Saturday, February 20th, 2010
You may hesitate to call it a revival, or even a renaissance...
But the nuclear industry is getting a boost, no matter how you slice it.
This week, President Obama said the government will guarantee loans for new nuclear plants — nearly three decades since U.S. soil last saw construction of a nuclear plant.
Hailed for its ability to wean us off of a carbon-fueled future and despised for its heavy stigma, nuclear energy is getting the boost it needs. The new move will give an $8.3 billion loan to the Southern Company (NYSE: SO) and its partners to help build two nuclear reactors in Georgia with projected completion in six to seven years.
It should be glaringly obvious by now that no single energy source will be a panacea for our looming energy crisis. But it is a step in the right direction...
= = = = =
Breakthroughs nowhere near this big have paid investors over 10x gains
Our resident biotech expert just came across a tiny company that can make the human immune system 1000 times more effective against dozens of deadly diseases -- including the major cancers: Prostate, lung, breast, cervical, and more...
Here's how their revolutionary "cell-shock" technology could hand you as much as 1000 times your money as it saves tens of millions worldwide.
So what else has been happening this week?
· The fate of hydraulic fracturing hangs in the balance as the House Energy and Commerce Committee started an investigation to determine the potential impacts on both the environment and human health.
· As you know, shale gas has exploded over the last several years — thanks mostly to advances made in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Federal regulations on "hydro-fracking" could have serious repercussions for our domestic gas production.
· The supermajors are finally getting their act together. ConocoPhillips announced it had replaced 141% of its reserves in 2009. Exxon released similar news, increasing the company's reserves by 133% last year.
· Petroleo Brasilerio, Brazil's state-controlled oil company, will issue $75 billion of shares in the world's largest stock sale. Although the company has yet to set a date for the sale, the company is expecting to raise nearly $50 billion in cash from investors.
· Meanwhile, Mexico is pinning its hopes and dreams on a new oilfield discovered in the south of the Gulf of Mexico. Developing this new field could take up to 2 years, and could potentially add another 150,000 barrels to the country's daily oil production.
· Mexico's Cantarell field is expected to pump out 2.3 million barrels per day in 2010. This 11.6% projected decline over 2009's production has situated the Mexican government between a rock and a hard place, especially after considering that approximately 40% of government revenue comes from the country's oil production.
· With Mexico's oil production spiraling downward, things are just starting to heat up for Canada. Oil and gas drilling rights in Alberta brought in $106 million this month — more than 12 times the amount of 2009's February land sale. We're chalking up Alberta's success to the Cardium formation, where companies are starting to utilize horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques. I've covered the Cardium oil formation for readers in the past, which is catching up to Saskatchewan's famous Bakken formation as the hottest oil play in North America.
Enjoy your weekend,
Keith Kohl
P.S. In case you missed our top stories from this week's Energy and Capital or our sister publications, I've included them below.
A Bakken Mistake Worth Millions: The Hottest Oil Play in the U.S. that Fooled Even the Experts
Energy and Capital readers have known about the Bakken formation for years, yet even they were surprised when one tiny error made their favorite oil stocks explode higher. Of course, the ride isn't over for us... because the Bakken's second round of profits has just begun.
Nuclear Energy's Second Wind: How to Harness Energy's New Picks and Shovels
Editor Nick Hodge takes the upcoming nuclear bull by the horns, showing investors which sectors are going to rake in the gains.
The Death of Death: One Overlooked American Biotech Making Huge Strides
It's a fact: disease is the #1 cause of death in the world. By a long shot. Energy and Capital reports: One tiny biotech company is developing new vaccines to fight the quiet killer that claims hundreds of thousands of lives each year. Learn how these guys can make you a small fortune on their latest breakthrough.
The Brewing Pension Funding Crisis: When this Train Arrives, It'll Run Us Over
Wealth Daily Editor Steve Christ sheds some light the crisis brewing in municipal pensions, which is leading us toward another financial disaster.
China, Denmark, and Renewable Energy: Two Countries Team Up after COP-15
International Editor Sam Hopkins explains why China and Denmark are teaming up to establish a clean energy research center. Find out how this will impact China's long-term energy efficiency goals.
Investing in Land Stocks: 6 Land Stocks to Safeguard your Portfolio
Wealth Daily Editor Luke Burgess touches on a commodity more important than gold or oil: land. Luke shows you what to look for when investing in land stocks... and gives you a headstart in your research.
The Single Uranium Stock to Buy Right Now: Uranium on the Rise as Obama Goes Nuclear
Are you ready for the nuclear revival? Wealth Daily Publisher Brian Hicks knows the next bull market in nuclear energy is right around the corner. In his latest musings, Brian offers one uranium company in a perfect position to make his readers a small fortune over the next six months.
DNA Vaccine Investments: This Bull Market is Just Heating Up
Editor Steve Christ weighs in on the next big thing in the biotech industry. Here's a hint: this third generation of new vaccines could make early investors a fortune over the long haul...
==========================
11. Impending Explosion: U.S. Intensifies Threats To Russia And Iran
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17709
By Rick Rozoff Global Research, February 19, 2010 Stop NATO - 2010-02-18
Washington and its NATO allies launched two of the three major wars in the world over the past eleven years in March against Yugoslavia in 1999 and against Iraq in 2003. The war drums are being pounded anew and the world may be headed for a catastrophe far worse than those in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq.
The United States, separately and through the military bloc it controls, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is accelerating military deployments and provocations throughout Eurasia and the Middle East.
Embroiled with fellow NATO members in the largest-scale military offensive of the joint war in Afghanistan launched eight years ago last October and well on the way to both extending and replicating the Afghan aggression in the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula [1], Washington and its allies are also taunting and threatening Russia as well as surrounding Iran with military forces and hardware preparatory to a potential attack on that nation.
MORE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17709
=======================
12. Navy dock in danger of becoming a 'nuclear dumping ground.'
The Ministry of Defence has put forward plans to use the Devonport dockyard in Plymouth as a centre for dismantling radioactive submarines. London Guardian, United Kingdom.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/fe ... ing-ground
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 25.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:31 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 25.10
Compilation:
1. MUST ATTEND CONFERENCE! Deep Green Resistance Training – Edmonton - March 26th - 28th!
2. PANEL DISCUSSION: The Greenbelt at Five Years: Planning for the Future – Toronto – Mar. 01, 2010
3. PETITION: “Buy American” Canada-US Procurement Agreement
4. In praise of … a nuclear-free Europe
5. A French documentary on nuclear waste
6. No Nukes News - Feb. 22, 2010
7. Senate votes to close Vermont Yankee in 2012
8. Job posting: Editor/Publisher, Briarpatch Magazine
9. LETTER: Kurtenbach: Recession 2008
10. Star Diamond Project - Fort a la Corne, Saskatchewan
11. ECOJUSTICE: Spring 2010 newsletter
12. WATCH: Tom Brokaw video a U.S. 'love letter' to Canada
13. Greenpeace SUCKS!!
=========================
1. MUST ATTEND CONFERENCE! Deep Green Resistance Training - Edmonton - March 26th - 28th!
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1563#1563
Derrick Jensen's Deep Green Resistance Training - Edmonton March 26-28th - REGISTER NOW and please forward on to others!
Derrick Jensen and co-facilitating friends are coming to Edmonton, Alberta on March 26-28th to do a 3 day intensive workshop called Deep Green Resistance. This 3-day workshop is particularly relevant to those of us who have been resisting the industrial developments of more tar sands, nuclear power and other environmental destructive projects. By bringing this conference to the prairies we will be building on the grassroots community that is already coming together, building on our network and strengthening our skills to bring about the changes we need to see.
The Deep Green Resistance training is a three-day workshop for activists, change-makers, and other concerned or inspired folks who are interested in delving into some critical reflection on the state of the world and our role in fixing it. We live in the most destructive culture to ever exist, yet does our activism reflect that? If we really accept the seriousness of the situation, what would that mean for our strategy and tactics? How do we build up a culture of resistance? These are some of the deep questions that will be explored over the weekend, while we build on our skills to continue doing good works.
The Deep Green Resistence is facilitated by Lierre Keith (http://www.lierrekeith.com/), Aric MacBay (http://www.inthewake.org/), and Derrick Jensen (www.derrickjensen.org) and promises to be an experience that you don't want to miss!!
COST
The thing is, the total cost for the training will be around $12 000 to bring to Edmonton. Currently, the idea is that if we can get 50 people registered, at a sliding scale of $200-$450 each for the weekend (with some APIRG subsidies available), by March 1st, the training will go ahead. - SO SIGN UP NOW!!
Billets are available, as well as carpools for folks coming from out of town to further cut down on your costs!! WE REALLY WANT YOU HERE!
REGISTER NOW! E-mail lierrekeith@yahoo.com and let her know your name, address and phone number. You can pay via paypal made out to derrick@derrickjensen.org or e-mail lierre to make other arrangements (lierrekeith@yahoo.com)
SPONSORSHIP/SUBSIDIZING?
Event organizers are still looking for people or organizations who can donate money free and clear of this however, so that we can either go ahead with less participants, or offer lowered fees. Right now $200 is the lowest we can afford as the workshop cannot take more than 50 participants. Can you or your organization provide some funding to support the training? Whether through direct donation or subsidized assistance for attendees?
Check out the link here: http://www.rageedm.com/wordpress/
REGISTER AND SPREAD THE WORD
Pass this email on to all folks and lists you think would be interested in attending or supporting this rad training, building the grassroots for a clean, green and just planet future!!
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1563#1563
=============================
2. PANEL DISCUSSION: The Greenbelt at Five Years: Planning for the Future – Toronto – Mar. 01, 2010
http://www.canurb.com/events/event_details.php?id=287
CUI presents a Partner event with the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation
Date: Monday, March 1, 2010
Time: 7:45 am to 10:00 am
Location: University of Toronto's Hart House, Music Room, 7 Hart House Circle, Toronto ON,
FEES: CUI Member/Student $32.00 - Non-member $40.00 - No GST applies.
Moderator: Laurie Monsebraaten, Toronto Star
Keynote: Maureen Carter-Whitney, Research Director, Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP)
Panelists:
Robert Eisenberg, Partner, York Heritage Properties
Debbie Zimmerman, CEO, Grape Growers of Ontario and Regional Councillor, Niagara Region
Rick Smith, Executive Director, Environmental Defence
When the Greenbelt Plan was approved in 2005, its goal of protecting environmentally sensitive lands and farmlands from urban development and sprawl was one of a number of bold moves by the government to come to grips with rapid growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Five years on, what has been the impact of permanently protecting prime farmland, forests, wetlands and watersheds? A new report authored by the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP) puts the achievement in international perspective and provides a context for answering a variety of important questions, including:
· What can Ontario's Greenbelt learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions?
· What are the opportunities and challenges in changing the form of urban development?
· How can we help ensure the viability of agriculture and viticulture in the Greenbelt?
· What is the rationale for extending the Greenbelt?
Join us for a celebration of the 5th anniversary of the Greenbelt's creation and a frank discussion of critical issues. Local and sustainable food options will be provided by Hart House catering
===========================
3. PETITION: “Buy American” Canada-US Procurement Agreement
From: JuliaP@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:34 PM
There are many concerns about the Canada-US Procurement Agreement (“BUYAMERICAN”). Here is the NDP’s work on this issue.
http://www.ndp.ca/press/
new-democrats-oppose-handling-buy-america-negotiations
http://www.rabble.ca/news/2010/02/
harper-folds-again-time-buy-american
SIGN THE PETITION - AND GET OTHERS TO SIGN IT TOO
If you would like to join the campaign for accountability, you can get a copy of the petition form by printing out the petition form.
Then, get the support of your friends, neighbours, people you work with and get them to sign the petition. When you have as many signatures as you can get, mail the petition (postage free) to Peter Julian's Parliamentary Office in Ottawa:
Peter Julian, MP for Burnaby-New Westminster
Room 178, Confederation Building
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Here is the link to an excellent study by the CCPA, analyzing the deal and exposing its shortcomings
http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/
reports/buy-american-basics
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
LETTER: 'Buy American' is a sellout – By KATHRYN LANGLEY – Feb. 2.10
Re "Buy American deal gets us back on track" (Point of View, Feb. 8) -
Provincial and municipal spending helps communities, especially when contracts are awarded locally. This includes purchasing done for hospital and school boards. Purchasing locally is good for the sustainability of our planet. The recently announced "Buy American" deal requires that Ontario sign on to the World Trade Organization's government procurement agreement (GPA). This could be disastrous for sub-national procurement and local communities, families, workers and for our environment. There was not enough notice to enable the electorate and media to discuss and to reject this agreement. It appears this could be another reason for the proroguing of Parliament. No questions or answers in the House of Commons. No "responsible government."
Under the proposed agreement, Canadian companies will get very little new access to U.S. public infrastructure spending as most of the contracts have already been signed. The U.S.A.'s stimulus package is set to expire. Access to future contracts has not been secured. The U.S.A. is likely to put "Buy American" conditions on future government spending. Signing on to WTO could mean miniscule short-term gains with long-term misery for our communities.
I'm curious as to why Canada would agree to this deal.
If stimulating our economy was the goal, Harper should have contributed more infrastructure money to our communities with "Buy Canadian" conditions. Instead, home owners were encouraged to make $10,000 renovations for $1,350 tax credits. This did little for students, renters or the homeless. It helped corporations like Home Depot. It reduced the money the government could direct towards health care, education, environment, green technology, pensions, anti-poverty measures, etc. All would have improved the quality of life for Canadians. Instead, Prime Minister Harper -without consultations or parliamentary process -committed us to "open markets" at a cost of reduced policy space for provincial and local governments.
While trade is important to the Canadian economy, signing the provinces onto the WTO procurement agreement is not about trade. It is about reducing the role of democratic governance when managing our economies. "Buy Local" policies are not protectionist. They are smart economic policy. They consider local producers and workers and limit the costs of transporting services and products long distances. Less fuel used. Less air and water pollution. Who chooses to work far from family? Signing with WTO excludes preferring to buy locally. Why would we want to give up this right?
The truth is we can walk away from this bad deal until provincial and municipal governments have discussed and debated publicly the implications of signing. It is the only democratic thing to do.
Kathryn Langley is a community-minded citizen.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
HARPER GIVES AWAY THE STORE, by James Laxer.
PM amends NAFTA, undermines local governments, to get in at the end of "Buy America" gold rush. http://www.straightgoods.ca/2010/ViewAr ... fm?Ref=238
===========================
4. In praise of … a nuclear-free Europe
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/24/
nuclear-weapon-free-europe-editorial
It is always best to start a long journey with small steps
Editorial The Guardian, Wednesday 24 February 2010 Article history
Five Nato states are to call for the removal of all remaining US nuclear weapons on European soil, a move that could spur global disarmament. One might have thought it would have been welcomed by a man who was not only a former secretary general of Nato, but is also a leading member of a parliamentary group for multilateral disarmament and non-proliferation. Alas no. George Robertson took the opposite view. Co-authoring a paper for the Centre for European Reform, he accused one of the states, Germany, of wishing to remain under the nuclear umbrella, while exporting to others the obligation of maintaining it; he warned of the consequences for decoupling the security of Europe from that of the US; and he said that Turkey could feel compelled to develop its own weapons. This is being unduly hawkish in a year in which the world could make serious steps towards disarmament. It is always best to start a long journey with small steps, and getting rid of between 150 and 240 useless weapons must rank as one of these. These weapons come in the shape of gravity bombs which take hours, if not days, to be loaded on to planes. They have been rendered all but obsolete by missiles which take minutes. Germany is seeking the withdrawal of US tactical nuclear weapons not just from its soil but from Europe as a whole.
MORE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/24/
nuclear-weapon-free-europe-editorial
====================
5. A French documentary on nuclear waste
http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/02/
a_french_documentary_on_n.html
International Panel on Fissile Materials: Tracking highly enriched uranium and plutonium, the key nuclear weapon materials
By Mycle Schneider on February 22, 2010
On 20 February 2010 Greenpeace issued a call for a moratorium on shipments of reprocessed uranium from France to Russia. Activists had been repeatedly blocking rail shipments of the material from the La Hague reprocessing plant to Cherbourg port.
Parliamentary enquiry, government statements, Greenpeace actions -- these are a few of the stunning consequences of a 100-minutes TV documentary Déchets - Le Cauchemar du Nucléaire (Waste - The Nuclear Nightmare) broadcast by the Franco-German station ARTE for the first time on 13 October 2009 and re-broadcast by various television stations since.
The documentary presents the results of an investigation into nuclear waste management in the US, Russia, Germany and France. The authors Eric Guéret and Laure Noualhat were often accompanied by technicians of the French independent radiation-monitoring lab CRIIRAD. They detected and measured radiation in many places where they went, from the Columbia river close to the US nuclear weapons lab in Hanford to the Soviet counterpart Mayak in the Urals.
Some of the most remarkable scenes include a Geiger counter that goes crazy under a publicly accessible bridge over the Techa river and a scene outside the French "plutonium factory" (called a reprocessing plant) at La Hague. In the latter case a spokesman for operator AREVA, when asked about radiation levels in the fields outside the plant, stated after a long hesitation that he would not call this contamination, but "absence of impact" before stumbling: "Well, we'll redo that one . . ."
However, remarkably enough, the largest impact was from a simple mass calculation that the journalists presented. Constantly facing the AREVA PR that states that 96% of the nuclear materials are "recycled" through the reprocessing scheme, the reporters inquired where the recovered uranium, roughly 95% of the mass of spent fuel, does end up.
MORE:
http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/02/
a_french_documentary_on_n.html
- - - - -
The full version of the film "Déchets - Le Cauchemar du Nucléaire", by Eric Guéret and Laure Noualhat (in French and German with English subtitles) is available online. ARTE-Editions has also published a 210-page book by Laure Noualhat with the same title (in French).
===========================
6. No Nukes News - Feb. 22, 2010
Uranium is the raw material of a power-elite who has taken Mother Earth’s every living creature hostage - The late Petra Kelly, German Green Party
Nobody Can Undo the Doo Doo from a Candu let alone contain it.
Tritium, the radioactive sibling of hydrogen, is created by fissioning inside a CANDU reactor. They use heavy water. Heavy water then becomes radioactive water. Chemically there is no way to separate radioactive water from stable water. Because Lake Ontario water provides the coolant water, it becomes populated with radioactive water before it is released back into the Lake. Lake Ontario is now a tritium dump. - Tim Seitz
----------------------------------------------------------------
Critics say Province is 'guessing' on Darlington price tag
Ontario Power Generation announced a reinvestment plan Tuesday which would see a $300 million upgrade to allow Pickering to run for approximately another decade, as well as the intention to refurbish the four reactors at Darlington, to extend their lifetime to about 2050. OPG officials say firm costs can't be known until preliminary studies, set to be carried out over the next four years, determine the scope of work to be completed during the refurbishment. Rough, very preliminary estimates indicate refurbishment of Darlington's four nuclear reactors, to extend their generation capability to about 2050, will cost $6 billion to $10 billion, says Infrastructure and Energy Minister Brad Duguid.
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/du ... cle/148621
Price should be public, MPP says
Ontario electricity customers have the right to know the sticker price on the refurbishment of the Darlington nuclear plant, NDP MPP Peter Tabuns says. "You don't make a multibillion-dollar decision based on a guess," Tabuns said Tuesday. "Either they're withholding numbers from the public or they're making a guess. In either case, that's indefensible."
http://www.intelligencer.ca/ArticleDisp ... ?e=2451845
Note: According to OPG’s news release, the restart of Pickering A Unit #1 was completed on time and on budget. This is not true! In 1999, OPG estimated that the total cost of returning Pickering A Unit #1 to service would be $213 million. Its actual cost was 4.8 times greater at $1.016 billion. Looks like OPG is up to its old tricks of deceiving the tax-paying public. If they want to upgrade Pickering and refurbish Darlington, they should be upfront with the costs – no more low-balling, leaving Ontario’s electricity consumers to cover the inevitable cost overruns. Ontario Energy Minister Brad Duguid should demand that the bids for the Pickering upgrade and Darlington refurbishment be a fixed-price one – that is, any cost overruns must not be passed on to Ontario’s electricity consumers or taxpayers. This is the rule that former Energy Minister George Smitherman established for the procurement process for two new nuclear reactors at Darlington. As a result Atomic Energy of Canada (AECL) was forced to submit an honest price bid that reflected the true cost. When Smitherman saw AECL’s honest $26 billion price tag, he had sticker shock and cancelled the procurement process.
Action: Please ask our new Energy Minister, Brad.Duguid@ontario.ca to protect consumers and taxpayers by applying the Smitherman Rule to the proposed Pickering B upgrade and the Darlington refurbishment – that is, both bids must be fixed-price – Ontario’s electricity consumers and taxpayers should not have to pay for nuclear cost overruns. (Please cc me.)
– angela@cleanairalliance.org
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of workers potentially exposed to radiation at Bruce nuclear plant: Watchdog
At least 217 workers at the Bruce Power nuclear plant northwest of Toronto were potentially exposed to a release of radiation last November, possibly the largest radioactive contamination in Canada, according to the country's national nuclear watchdog.
It is believed to be one of the largest mass exposures to radiation at a Canadian nuclear site.
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/natio ... ice=mobile
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/
Hundreds+workers+potentially+exposed+radiation+nuclear
+plant+Watchdog/2572560/story.html
Full test results for workers won't be ready for months
It will be another four months at least before all 192 workers who may have been exposed to dangerous radiation at the Bruce A nuclear plant in southern Ontario know whether their health has been jeopardized. Unusual levels of radioactive particles in the air were first detected on Nov. 26 and Nov. 28 as workers for the private consortium were refurbishing feeder pipes inside the vault of the dormant reactor. That work has now been halted.
http://www.nugget.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2456615
Alpha radiation surprise at Bruce
An incident that may have exposed hundreds of workers at Bruce Power to low levels of radiation has revealed an apparent gap in safety procedures at Canadian nuclear facilities.
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/Articl ... ?e=2456034
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario Power Generation confirms Pickering nuclear station to close in 10 years
Ontario Power Generation announced Tuesday that it will spend $300 million to keep the Pickering nuclear station open for another decade before it's mothballed, and will spend an undisclosed amount to refurbish the Darlington nuclear station.
Greenpeace Canada applauded Ontario Power Generation for admitting it was too costly to keep the Pickering nuclear station open for more than another 10 years. ``Today's announcement shows the cost estimates used to justify this government's commitment to nuclear power are not credible at all, and we should be revisiting the 2006 commitment to keep nuclear at 50 per cent of the supply over the long term,'' Stensil said. ``It'll bankrupt us if we implement that plan.''
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/
ontario-power-generation-confirms-pickering-nuclear-station-
to-close-in-10-years-84521182.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate: Eight Convenient Truths
By Amory B. Lovins
Electricity production is shifting rapidly and profoundly from giant coal- and gas-fired and nuclear plants to “micropower”—cogenerating electricity together with useful heat in factories and buildings, plus renewables (not counting big hydro dams).
There’s no business case for building nuclear plants—nor other central power plants.
To the surprise of many, nuclear power’s collapse is also good for climate protection. New nuclear plants could save carbon, but two to 20 times less per dollar, and 20 to 40 times less per year, than buying the market winners instead—micropower and efficiency. If greenhouse-gas emissions are a problem, we need the most solution per dollar and per year; anything less will reduce and retard climate protection. We need judicious, not indiscriminate, investment—best buys first. We don’t need everything, we can’t afford everything, and every dollar and year we spend on one choice excludes other choices.
http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Climate-+Eight+Convenient+Truths
------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
Eventually, extravagant government largesse might create a nuclear rebirth of sorts — but it might end up strangling better solutions in their cribs or prevent them from ever being born.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 46,00.html
Obama Pledges Billions for 20th Century's Most Expensive Technological Failure -- Nuclear Power
Obama has announced some $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for two new reactors planned for Georgia, which are unable to withstand natural cataclysms like hurricanes.
As Vermont seethes with radioactive contamination and the Democratic Party crumbles, Barack Obama has plunged into the atomic abyss.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/145718
Obama's latest bipartisan outreach: nuclear energy
http://www.sfexaminer.com/politics/ap/o ... 01797.html
Obama's nuclear power push faces obstacle: Waste
President Obama's announcement Tuesday of loan guarantees for nuclear power plants may encourage new construction, but a problem still remains that has plagued atomic energy for decades: what to do with nuclear waste?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/16/ ... /?hpt=Sbin
Barack Obama is going nuclear
By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now
From economics, to the environment, to the prevention of nuclear threats, Obama's nuclear loan guarantees fail on all counts.
http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/2010/02 ... ng-nuclear
Obama's Nuclear Boondoggle
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010 ... es-nuclear
------------------------------------------------------------------
Leak Continues at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant
Bad news continues to flow from the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. Levels of radioactive contamination are growing in several on-site wells at the power plant, according to the Vermont Department of Health (VDH). Vermont Senate vote on closing nuclear plant could come next week.
http://trueslant.com/oshagraydavidson/2010/02/18/
leak-continues-at-vermont-yankee-nuclear-power-plant/
VT Nuclear Plant Leaking- Industry Faces Concern Nationwide
As President Obama advocates expansion of America's nuclear power industry, pushing for billions of dollars in federal incentives and announcing plans to build the first nuclear plant in decades, a long-running facility in Vermont is leaking a cancer causing carcinogen. The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant is leaking possibly dangerous levels of tritium, a radioactive byproduct of the nuclear process.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/19/
vt-nuclear-plant-leaking-industry-faces-concern-nationwide/?test=latestnews
------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Power: No Answer to Climate Change
http://www.cane.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/
Why-nuclear-power-is-not-the-answer.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------
The impacts of uranium mining on indigenous communities
Uranium mining speculation lacks comprehensive health and safety regulations while the ethics of Canadian exported uranium, which can lead to depleted uranium used in zones of war, needs greater scrutiny. Abandoned uranium mines and the subsequent hazards experienced in forgotten communities have also been virtually ignored in Canada leading to tragic, unmitigated circumstances.
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op= ... 8041&mode=
thread&order=0&thold=0
------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsuccessful 'Fast Breeder' Is No Solution for Long-Term Reactor Waste Disposal Issues
After Over $50 Billion Spent by U.S., Japan, Russia, UK, India and France, No Commercial Model Found
High Cost, Unreliability, Major Safety Problems and Proliferation Risks All Seen as Major Barriers to Use
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/
report--unsuccessful-fast-breeder-is-no-solution-for-long-term-
reactor-waste-disposal-issues-84610032.html
Fourth generation nuclear power may not be the clean energy silver bullet
http://blogs.ft.com/energy-source/2010/02/18/
fourth-generation-nuclear-power-may-not-be-the-clean-energy-silver-bullet/
Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
South Africa has stopped funding the development of the pebble bed modular reactor, leaving the project company looking at 75% cuts in staff.
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C_PBM ... 02101.html
Background: More evidence that the wheels are coming off the "nuclear renaissance" concept. When large reactors ran into financial roadblocks due to "sticker shock", many nuclear enthusiasts started touting small reactors as the answer, including the pebble bed reactor concept for Alberta's tar sands industry. Think again, folks. - Gordon Edwards.
------------------------------------------------------------------
10 surprisingly easy sources of alternative energy - Unconventional energy
Sure, you've heard of wind and solar power, biofuels, hydroelectric, tidal and wave power, but Mother Nature provides an endless bounty of alternative energy sources beyond those that we use today. Clean, green energy is all around us in the natural world, and scientists have only begun to answer the question of how to tap it. Here's a list of 10 practical sources of alternative energy you've probably never heard of.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/photos/
10-unconventional-alternative-energy-sources-youve-never-heard-3#image
------------------------------------------------------------------
WeConserveTV
The Conservation Council of Ontario is proud to announce that we will soon launch Canada's first video website devoted exclusively to conservation. Be one of the first to take part in our project by making a video to celebrate your project or identify your local challenge. Posting a video is easy! Simply follow the instructions www.weconservetv.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Energy taking off worldwide
The Global Wind Energy Council, a trade association based in Brussels, estimates that wind power capacity grew by 31 percent worldwide in 2009. According to the trade group, more than 500,000 people are now employed by the wind power industry around the world, and the market for wind turbine installations last year was worth about $63 billion.
http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/41025
------------------------------------------------------------------
Coal quickly losing power
Old King Coal should abdicate now, the Ontario Clean Air Alliance says.
Set to be shuttered by 2014, the province's four remaining coal-fired electricity generating plants could in fact be closed now, largely because the province is using less power than expected.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2 ... 38971.html
For more info: http://www.cleanairalliance.org/node/808
http://www.cleanairalliance.org/files/active/0/
phaseout%20progress%202010.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff
Outreach Director
Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402
Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
================================
7. Senate votes to close Vermont Yankee in 2012
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/288064
By Martin Laine. Feb. 24.10
Nuclear energy opponents cheered as the Vermont Senate today voted overwhelmingly against renewing the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant’s license to operate after 2012. Last minute efforts to delay the vote failed.
Even an offer by the plant’s parent company, Entergy Corp., of New Orleans, to sell electricity at a discounted rate for the next three years failed to change any minds.
After four hours of debate, the Senate voted 26-4 against recommending the renewal. The plant opened in 1972 with a license set to expire in 2012. Entergy had sought a 20-year extension.
Supporters had argued that the plant provides much-needed electricity to the state, as well as much-needed jobs. Until recently, it had appeared that lawmakers would go along with renewal but the discovery of leaking radioactive tritium at the Vernon, Vt., plant and the company’s less than forthright response caused many to change their minds.
Vermont is the only state in the nation where the legislature has a voice in the approval of nuclear power plant licenses. In other states, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other regulatory bodies hold that authority.
Today’s vote, while a setback to supporters, is most likely not the final word. Lawmakers can take up the matter again next year, after elections. And Entergy officials have threatened to sue the state if it does not approve the extension.
MORE: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/288064
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Vermont Senate Wants Entergy Reactor Shut in 2012
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/24-11
by Scott DiSavino Published on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 by Reuters
NEW YORK - The Vermont Senate said on Wednesday it has voted to shut Entergy Corp's Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant when its license expires in 2012, after a leak releasing radioactive tritium into the groundwater was discovered last month.
While the Obama administration advocates a nuclear revival to reduce dependency on foreign oil and greenhouse gas emissions, opponents of Vermont Yankee have used the leak to show Entergy is not operating the reactor safely and that it license should not be renewed.
Entergy applied with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2006 to renew the 40 year operating license for the plant, which began operations in 1972, for an additional 20 years.
"The effort to win a 20-year renewal of Vermont Yankee's operating license is far from over," Entergy said in a statement.
"We remain determined to prove our case to the legislature, state officials and the Vermont public."
If the vote is upheld, it would be the first time in more than 20 years that a state legislature has acted to shut down a reactor.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/24-11
======================
8. Job posting: Editor/Publisher, Briarpatch Magazine
http://briarpatchmagazine.com/
Application deadline: March 1, 2010
Are you passionate about independent media and progressive/radical politics? Are you a talented communicator with an entrepreneurial spirit, ready to take the reins of a respected Canadian magazine? Do you want to work for a grassroots organization that enables you to put your politics into practice?
As part of a shift into participatory economics and balanced job complexes, Briarpatch seeks a crackerjack Editor/Publisher to jointly oversee all aspects of producing a bi-monthly magazine.
As one of two full-time staff in a horizontal workplace, the successful candidate will share equal responsibility for core editorial, organizational and administrative tasks, and will report directly to a volunteer board of directors.
Though no candidate is expected to have all of the following, the ideal candidate would have:
* excellent written communication skills, with experience in editing, journalism, graphic design, and/or creative/political writing;
* a grasp of anti-capitalist/anti-oppression/ecological politics and principles;
* a passion for independent media;
* a knowledge of and affinity for Briarpatch Magazine and its mandate;
* an ability to work independently and cooperatively and to juggle diverse responsibilities that range from organizational development to filing, from editorial and art direction to proofreading, and from long-term financial planning to data entry;
* experience administering a non-profit organization, preferably with publishing experience;
* strong computer skills, including familiarity with Microsoft Office (Word, Excel), Adobe Creative Suite, Simply Accounting, basic website maintenance and social media skills;
* a head for finance, numbers and small business management;
* a knack for fundraising and event organizing;
* a socially minded entrepreneurial spirit; and
* a wicked sense of humour.
Please note that the desire and ability to pick up new skills, and the ability to work well with existing employees and board members, are equally important as any of the above qualifications.
This is a full-time, unionized position; wage and benefits as per the collective agreement. The job is based in Regina, Saskatchewan, which is actually a great place to live. (We can provide references to that effect from others lured here by Briarpatch.)
Briarpatch particularly encourages applicants from diverse backgrounds and members of equity-seeking groups.
Please include in your application a cover letter, resume and short writing sample. Your cover letter should speak to your qualifications for and interest in this position.
Please email applications to givemeajob@briarpatchmagazine.com by March 1. Only those candidates chosen for an interview will be contacted.
About Briarpatch
Briarpatch Magazine is a non-profit bi-monthly publication. Fiercely independent and frequently irreverent, Briarpatch delves into today’s most pressing social and political issues from a radical, grassroots perspective, aiming always to challenge, inspire and empower its readers.
==========================
9. LETTER: Kurtenbach: Recession 2008
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1564#1564
February 23, 2010 5:23 PM
To the Editor,
In my last letter I wrote about Canada 's National Debt, and the cost of that debt which is borne by Canadian taxpayers.
However, there is an even greater financial cloud hanging over Canada. It is the astronomical debt of our neighbor --the USA.
After the great Depression of 1929, the American administration introduced the Glass/Steagall Act. It was designed to regulate the greedy wolves of Wall Street, but in the 1990's President Clinton repealed that Act.
Jack Cafferty, recently speaking on the Wolf Blitzer TV show, stated that the U.S. national debt is $14.6 trillion. Consumer Credit Card debt is estimated at $8 to 10 trillion. It is difficult to assess Corporate debt, but $15 trillion has been suggested. The annual budget deficit is $1.4 trillion Then there are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan expected to cost trillions of dollars, with Canadian troops now involved.
It's difficult [especially for this peasant] to find relevance to 1 trillion dollars. However, a professor with a PhD in math placed it in perspective for us: "If I gave you 1 trillion dollars in 1 dollar bills, and told you its all yours if you count each bill,-- you would be the sole owner after counting for about 32,000 years!"
Ben Bernanke, past chairman of the US Federal Reserve Bank, who recently was reappointed for another term by President Obama, stated he did not see this recession coming. Alan Greenspan, who retired in 2006 said the same. He was the spokesman for that group of gilded, greedy gurus on Wall Street, along with Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and others. They managed to convince the American Senate and the House of Representatives that the first monetary glitches due to the sale of derivatives and hedge funds -- a $27 trillion market -- or the fraud, would be taken care of by "the market". That statement was utter nonsense.
The first signs of a Wall Street and bank mess-up, around the year 2000, was brought to the attention of the U.S. administration by a young brilliant legal lady, named Brooksley Born. Government officials became concerned and appointed Born to head up of what became known as the Long Term Capital Management office. However, under pressure from powerful financial interests, Born was replaced by a new chairman who met the approval of the boys on Wall Street.
The rest is history. The Wall Street financial bubble finally burst in 2008. There were world-wide heavy losses sustained by many financial institutions and millions of smaller investors, but it also made a few investors a great deal wealthier, leaving the American taxpayers to clean up the mess, a mess which will also affect Canadians.
Leo Kurtenbach,
Box 268, Cudworth, Sask., S0K 1B0
Phone (306) 256 3638
=======================
10. Star Diamond Project - Fort a la Corne, Saskatchewan
http://www.shoregold.com/sdp.html
The Fort a la Corne area of Saskatchewan hosts one of the most extensive kimberlite fields in the world. Over 70 kimberlites exist in the Fort a la Corne province and over 70 percent of these have been shown to contain diamonds. The deposition and erosional history at Fort a la Corne is such that the crater portions of the volcanic eruptive events have been preserved and not scraped away by glaciation, as is the case with most kimberlites. As a result, the crater portion of the kimberlite has significant geographic extent. The Star kimberlite averages 88 meters in thickness and covers an area over four square kilometres. The kimberlite is covered by 90 meters of overburden, consisting mostly of sand, mudstone and glacial till. Shore was the first company in the Fort a la Corne district to locate a root zone beneath the kimberlite crater when drill hole Star 20 intersected 539 metres of continuous kimberlite. This is the longest intersection of continuous kimberlite from a vertical drill hole ever reported in North America.
Location and Access (Maps)
The Star Diamond project is located approximately 60 kilometres east of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, a major supply centre for Northern Saskatchewan. A paved highway, gravel road grid system, and an extensive network of forestry roads provide excellent year round access to Shore’s property. The Star Kimberlite is situated in a burned portion of the Fort a la Corne forest, 2 kilometres north of the Saskatchewan River and 21kilometres to the west of a 25 Kilovolt power line.
The project area consists of 45 contiguous mineral dispositions totaling 9,808 hectares and is 100% owned by Shore. The Company holds 395 claims covering 219,196 hectares.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Background:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1574#1574
==========================
11. ECOJUSTICE: Spring 2010 newsletter
Shows how our wins protect Canada’s wildlife and Canadians’ environmental rights.
Supreme Court of Canada win protects public voice
Endangered turtles get helping hand
Securing rights to a healthy environment
...and many more! Read them here
Recent publications
Ecojustice creates free, online legal and scientific reports that critically examine the latest environmental problems and offer concrete solutions.
In our first bilingual report, uOttawa-Ecojustice lawyer Will Amos puts citizens and the environment first in calling for Quebec mining law reform.
More reports...
For the latest updates, check our blog
The Ecojustice blog provides up-to-date results on our work and opportunities for you to take action on Canada’s most pressing environmental issues. Check out our recent entries:
Ecojustice wins at the Supreme Court of Canada
Tasked with a death watch
Climate battles to the courts
============================
12. WATCH: Tom Brokaw video a U.S. 'love letter' to Canada
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Brokaw+vid ... er+Canada/
2598965/story.html
By Laura Stone, Canwest News Service February 22, 2010
==============================
13. Greenpeace SUCKS!!
http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/306350
Feb 19, 2007
As much as in-fighting amongst groups sucks and should be discouraged sometimes someone totally oversteps the mark and just takes the piss. And can it really be called in-fighting if the groups in question seem to have very different objectives?
Taken from the Sea Shepherd website.
Greenpeace Eats Whales to "Save" Them
Greenpeace has gone over the line this time in betraying the whales.
The Greenpeace Foundation has launched a bizarre and contradictory campaign to "save" the whales. This week on Valentine's Day, Greenpeace hit the road in Japan with the strangely named "Whale Love Wagon."
The campaign opened by asking supporters to send a fax transmission to the Antarctic whaling fleet saying, "I love Japan but whaling breaks my heart."
The Greenpeace attitude is that if they can't beat them, then they should join them. And in doing so, Greenpeacers have betrayed the whales. They are eating them.
In promoting their theme that Japanese whale eating culture must be respected, a video distributed by Greenpeace depicts a Greenpeacer visiting a Japanese grandmother in her home. He sits down and eats whale with her, and politely tells her that is was delicious.
"We are making it very clear that we have no problem with Japanese culture or eating whale," said Emiliano Ezcurra, an Argentinian Greenpeace activist who helped design the campaign.
Ezcurra said that Greenpeace has no problem with whaling on Japan's coast but opposes the slaughter of the whales in the Southern Oceans Whale Sanctuary.
Sea Shepherd Founder and President Captain Paul Watson, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace is appalled at the pro-whaling stance of Greenpeace. "This campaign is just simply bizarre," said Captain Watson, "How does Greenpeace think they are going to stop whaling in Antarctica by publicly eating whale meat and declaring whale meat to be delicious? What are these people thinking?"
This is not the first time that Greenpeace has betrayed the whales. In 1997, they assisted in a Yupik whale hunt by towing a dead bowhead whale ashore and ate whale meat as guests of the community.
Greenpeace International Director John Frizell has openly stated that Greenpeace is not opposed to whaling in principle.
MORE: http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/306350
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Greenpeace Greenwash
http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/story/2765
Greenpeace International hires torchbearer Tzeporah Berman as chief climate campaigner
by Macdonald Stainsby →2010 Olympics Environment February 15, 2010
As the world turned their attention to the spectacle of the 2010 Olympics, Greenpeace International played another kind of game, appointing Tzeporah Berman as their new energy and climate campaign director. As a result, she will inherit their “Stop the Tar Sands” campaign and take responsibility for 110 Greenpeace climate campaigners in 28 countries. In the last few years Berman has been known to accommodate corporate interests, provided they make minor concessions and release joint statements. Greenpeace itself, by teaming with Olympic corporate sponsor Coca-Cola, has made clear this strategy also falls within their overall corporate strategy.
Berman, a former a Greenpeace BC campaigner, was recently appointed to the BC Liberal government as an “adviser” on free market-based “green energy” initiatives. She immediately conferred an award to BC Premier Gordon Campbell’s “leadership” in fighting climate change while at the Copenhagen negotiations. This, even though BC was the only province in Canada whose tally of greenhouse gas emissions for the year 2009 was higher than the year before. While Berman was on the inside at Copenhagen handing an award to Premier Campbell (whom she now worked for), tens of thousands of activists calling for real action on climate change were being arrested, beaten and tear gassed. According to the Vancouver Sun, Berman “decided to apply for the job after reconnecting with Greenpeace representatives at the Copenhagen climate conference last December.” Her decision came roughly the same time as Greenpeace International was releasing their statement with Coca-Cola.
MORE: http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/story/2765
Also in Environment:
The Tar Sands Oilympics
Land disputes continue despite Olympics
D.O.A. - Talk - Action = Zero. an interview with Mr. Shithead.
Members of Coast Salish Katzie First Nation, supporters block Golden Ears Bridge
Opening Shenanigans
Greenpeace Greenwash
Balaclava! VMC Olympic Broadsheet, issue 5
Its all garbage! EH whad!
2010 Photo Lens: Heart Attack!!
Balaclava! VMC Olympic Broadsheet, issue 4
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ACTION ALERT! Is Greenpeace International set to become Greenpeace Electric?
http://canadianclimateaction.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/
action-alert-is-greenpeace-international-set-to-become-greenpeace-electric/
“One of the truest tests of integrity is its blunt refusal to be compromised.” – Chinua Achebe Nigerian Writer
First the tcktcktck scandal and now this
The recent decision by Greenpeace International to hire Tzeporah Berman to direct its global climate and energy campaign could be the most disastrous decision for Greenpeace ever made. It is quite possible that this move may destroy the organizations reputation in such a damaging way it may never recover. The current economic system has caused us to have entered into what Dr. E.O. Wilson describes as ‘the sixth extinction’ – a phrase that many scientists are now using. We now face climate catastrophe on a dying planet already well on the pathway to a 6C temperature rise which will kill off most life. This recent appointment of Tzeporah Berman could be the greatest threat climate change justice has yet to face. Who is Tzeporah Berman anyway? Tzeporah Berman could be described as a Trojan horse for the biggest corporations on the planet. She has successfully entrenched her way into the position of bargaining away nature to the corporations, under the guise of an environmentalist. Perhaps this is a seemingly much better strategy than just having Pat Moore “ex-Greenpeace” running around supporting the corporations. The corporations have finally succeeded in placing a compromised ‘environmentalist’ into the very heart of Greenpeace – the most recognized environmental organization on the planet.
The day after Tzeporah Berman announced her new Greenpeace role, she walked into an exclusive General Electric (GE) banquet (past the real environmental protesters) and delivered a speech supporting the privatization of some 600 rivers in British Columbia, Canada, for the benefit of GE and their subsidiaries and partners. So there was Greenpeace (not officially, of course, but in the public mind) endorsing the wholesale surrender of our environment to one of the most predatory corporations on the planet – GE has paid fines for illegal weapons trade fraud, money laundering, etc.
MORE:
http://canadianclimateaction.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/
action-alert-is-greenpeace-international-set-to-become-greenpeace-electric/
Compilation:
1. MUST ATTEND CONFERENCE! Deep Green Resistance Training – Edmonton - March 26th - 28th!
2. PANEL DISCUSSION: The Greenbelt at Five Years: Planning for the Future – Toronto – Mar. 01, 2010
3. PETITION: “Buy American” Canada-US Procurement Agreement
4. In praise of … a nuclear-free Europe
5. A French documentary on nuclear waste
6. No Nukes News - Feb. 22, 2010
7. Senate votes to close Vermont Yankee in 2012
8. Job posting: Editor/Publisher, Briarpatch Magazine
9. LETTER: Kurtenbach: Recession 2008
10. Star Diamond Project - Fort a la Corne, Saskatchewan
11. ECOJUSTICE: Spring 2010 newsletter
12. WATCH: Tom Brokaw video a U.S. 'love letter' to Canada
13. Greenpeace SUCKS!!
=========================
1. MUST ATTEND CONFERENCE! Deep Green Resistance Training - Edmonton - March 26th - 28th!
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1563#1563
Derrick Jensen's Deep Green Resistance Training - Edmonton March 26-28th - REGISTER NOW and please forward on to others!
Derrick Jensen and co-facilitating friends are coming to Edmonton, Alberta on March 26-28th to do a 3 day intensive workshop called Deep Green Resistance. This 3-day workshop is particularly relevant to those of us who have been resisting the industrial developments of more tar sands, nuclear power and other environmental destructive projects. By bringing this conference to the prairies we will be building on the grassroots community that is already coming together, building on our network and strengthening our skills to bring about the changes we need to see.
The Deep Green Resistance training is a three-day workshop for activists, change-makers, and other concerned or inspired folks who are interested in delving into some critical reflection on the state of the world and our role in fixing it. We live in the most destructive culture to ever exist, yet does our activism reflect that? If we really accept the seriousness of the situation, what would that mean for our strategy and tactics? How do we build up a culture of resistance? These are some of the deep questions that will be explored over the weekend, while we build on our skills to continue doing good works.
The Deep Green Resistence is facilitated by Lierre Keith (http://www.lierrekeith.com/), Aric MacBay (http://www.inthewake.org/), and Derrick Jensen (www.derrickjensen.org) and promises to be an experience that you don't want to miss!!
COST
The thing is, the total cost for the training will be around $12 000 to bring to Edmonton. Currently, the idea is that if we can get 50 people registered, at a sliding scale of $200-$450 each for the weekend (with some APIRG subsidies available), by March 1st, the training will go ahead. - SO SIGN UP NOW!!
Billets are available, as well as carpools for folks coming from out of town to further cut down on your costs!! WE REALLY WANT YOU HERE!
REGISTER NOW! E-mail lierrekeith@yahoo.com and let her know your name, address and phone number. You can pay via paypal made out to derrick@derrickjensen.org or e-mail lierre to make other arrangements (lierrekeith@yahoo.com)
SPONSORSHIP/SUBSIDIZING?
Event organizers are still looking for people or organizations who can donate money free and clear of this however, so that we can either go ahead with less participants, or offer lowered fees. Right now $200 is the lowest we can afford as the workshop cannot take more than 50 participants. Can you or your organization provide some funding to support the training? Whether through direct donation or subsidized assistance for attendees?
Check out the link here: http://www.rageedm.com/wordpress/
REGISTER AND SPREAD THE WORD
Pass this email on to all folks and lists you think would be interested in attending or supporting this rad training, building the grassroots for a clean, green and just planet future!!
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1563#1563
=============================
2. PANEL DISCUSSION: The Greenbelt at Five Years: Planning for the Future – Toronto – Mar. 01, 2010
http://www.canurb.com/events/event_details.php?id=287
CUI presents a Partner event with the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation
Date: Monday, March 1, 2010
Time: 7:45 am to 10:00 am
Location: University of Toronto's Hart House, Music Room, 7 Hart House Circle, Toronto ON,
FEES: CUI Member/Student $32.00 - Non-member $40.00 - No GST applies.
Moderator: Laurie Monsebraaten, Toronto Star
Keynote: Maureen Carter-Whitney, Research Director, Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP)
Panelists:
Robert Eisenberg, Partner, York Heritage Properties
Debbie Zimmerman, CEO, Grape Growers of Ontario and Regional Councillor, Niagara Region
Rick Smith, Executive Director, Environmental Defence
When the Greenbelt Plan was approved in 2005, its goal of protecting environmentally sensitive lands and farmlands from urban development and sprawl was one of a number of bold moves by the government to come to grips with rapid growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Five years on, what has been the impact of permanently protecting prime farmland, forests, wetlands and watersheds? A new report authored by the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP) puts the achievement in international perspective and provides a context for answering a variety of important questions, including:
· What can Ontario's Greenbelt learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions?
· What are the opportunities and challenges in changing the form of urban development?
· How can we help ensure the viability of agriculture and viticulture in the Greenbelt?
· What is the rationale for extending the Greenbelt?
Join us for a celebration of the 5th anniversary of the Greenbelt's creation and a frank discussion of critical issues. Local and sustainable food options will be provided by Hart House catering
===========================
3. PETITION: “Buy American” Canada-US Procurement Agreement
From: JuliaP@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:34 PM
There are many concerns about the Canada-US Procurement Agreement (“BUYAMERICAN”). Here is the NDP’s work on this issue.
http://www.ndp.ca/press/
new-democrats-oppose-handling-buy-america-negotiations
http://www.rabble.ca/news/2010/02/
harper-folds-again-time-buy-american
SIGN THE PETITION - AND GET OTHERS TO SIGN IT TOO
If you would like to join the campaign for accountability, you can get a copy of the petition form by printing out the petition form.
Then, get the support of your friends, neighbours, people you work with and get them to sign the petition. When you have as many signatures as you can get, mail the petition (postage free) to Peter Julian's Parliamentary Office in Ottawa:
Peter Julian, MP for Burnaby-New Westminster
Room 178, Confederation Building
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Here is the link to an excellent study by the CCPA, analyzing the deal and exposing its shortcomings
http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/
reports/buy-american-basics
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
LETTER: 'Buy American' is a sellout – By KATHRYN LANGLEY – Feb. 2.10
Re "Buy American deal gets us back on track" (Point of View, Feb. 8) -
Provincial and municipal spending helps communities, especially when contracts are awarded locally. This includes purchasing done for hospital and school boards. Purchasing locally is good for the sustainability of our planet. The recently announced "Buy American" deal requires that Ontario sign on to the World Trade Organization's government procurement agreement (GPA). This could be disastrous for sub-national procurement and local communities, families, workers and for our environment. There was not enough notice to enable the electorate and media to discuss and to reject this agreement. It appears this could be another reason for the proroguing of Parliament. No questions or answers in the House of Commons. No "responsible government."
Under the proposed agreement, Canadian companies will get very little new access to U.S. public infrastructure spending as most of the contracts have already been signed. The U.S.A.'s stimulus package is set to expire. Access to future contracts has not been secured. The U.S.A. is likely to put "Buy American" conditions on future government spending. Signing on to WTO could mean miniscule short-term gains with long-term misery for our communities.
I'm curious as to why Canada would agree to this deal.
If stimulating our economy was the goal, Harper should have contributed more infrastructure money to our communities with "Buy Canadian" conditions. Instead, home owners were encouraged to make $10,000 renovations for $1,350 tax credits. This did little for students, renters or the homeless. It helped corporations like Home Depot. It reduced the money the government could direct towards health care, education, environment, green technology, pensions, anti-poverty measures, etc. All would have improved the quality of life for Canadians. Instead, Prime Minister Harper -without consultations or parliamentary process -committed us to "open markets" at a cost of reduced policy space for provincial and local governments.
While trade is important to the Canadian economy, signing the provinces onto the WTO procurement agreement is not about trade. It is about reducing the role of democratic governance when managing our economies. "Buy Local" policies are not protectionist. They are smart economic policy. They consider local producers and workers and limit the costs of transporting services and products long distances. Less fuel used. Less air and water pollution. Who chooses to work far from family? Signing with WTO excludes preferring to buy locally. Why would we want to give up this right?
The truth is we can walk away from this bad deal until provincial and municipal governments have discussed and debated publicly the implications of signing. It is the only democratic thing to do.
Kathryn Langley is a community-minded citizen.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
HARPER GIVES AWAY THE STORE, by James Laxer.
PM amends NAFTA, undermines local governments, to get in at the end of "Buy America" gold rush. http://www.straightgoods.ca/2010/ViewAr ... fm?Ref=238
===========================
4. In praise of … a nuclear-free Europe
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/24/
nuclear-weapon-free-europe-editorial
It is always best to start a long journey with small steps
Editorial The Guardian, Wednesday 24 February 2010 Article history
Five Nato states are to call for the removal of all remaining US nuclear weapons on European soil, a move that could spur global disarmament. One might have thought it would have been welcomed by a man who was not only a former secretary general of Nato, but is also a leading member of a parliamentary group for multilateral disarmament and non-proliferation. Alas no. George Robertson took the opposite view. Co-authoring a paper for the Centre for European Reform, he accused one of the states, Germany, of wishing to remain under the nuclear umbrella, while exporting to others the obligation of maintaining it; he warned of the consequences for decoupling the security of Europe from that of the US; and he said that Turkey could feel compelled to develop its own weapons. This is being unduly hawkish in a year in which the world could make serious steps towards disarmament. It is always best to start a long journey with small steps, and getting rid of between 150 and 240 useless weapons must rank as one of these. These weapons come in the shape of gravity bombs which take hours, if not days, to be loaded on to planes. They have been rendered all but obsolete by missiles which take minutes. Germany is seeking the withdrawal of US tactical nuclear weapons not just from its soil but from Europe as a whole.
MORE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/24/
nuclear-weapon-free-europe-editorial
====================
5. A French documentary on nuclear waste
http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/02/
a_french_documentary_on_n.html
International Panel on Fissile Materials: Tracking highly enriched uranium and plutonium, the key nuclear weapon materials
By Mycle Schneider on February 22, 2010
On 20 February 2010 Greenpeace issued a call for a moratorium on shipments of reprocessed uranium from France to Russia. Activists had been repeatedly blocking rail shipments of the material from the La Hague reprocessing plant to Cherbourg port.
Parliamentary enquiry, government statements, Greenpeace actions -- these are a few of the stunning consequences of a 100-minutes TV documentary Déchets - Le Cauchemar du Nucléaire (Waste - The Nuclear Nightmare) broadcast by the Franco-German station ARTE for the first time on 13 October 2009 and re-broadcast by various television stations since.
The documentary presents the results of an investigation into nuclear waste management in the US, Russia, Germany and France. The authors Eric Guéret and Laure Noualhat were often accompanied by technicians of the French independent radiation-monitoring lab CRIIRAD. They detected and measured radiation in many places where they went, from the Columbia river close to the US nuclear weapons lab in Hanford to the Soviet counterpart Mayak in the Urals.
Some of the most remarkable scenes include a Geiger counter that goes crazy under a publicly accessible bridge over the Techa river and a scene outside the French "plutonium factory" (called a reprocessing plant) at La Hague. In the latter case a spokesman for operator AREVA, when asked about radiation levels in the fields outside the plant, stated after a long hesitation that he would not call this contamination, but "absence of impact" before stumbling: "Well, we'll redo that one . . ."
However, remarkably enough, the largest impact was from a simple mass calculation that the journalists presented. Constantly facing the AREVA PR that states that 96% of the nuclear materials are "recycled" through the reprocessing scheme, the reporters inquired where the recovered uranium, roughly 95% of the mass of spent fuel, does end up.
MORE:
http://www.fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/02/
a_french_documentary_on_n.html
- - - - -
The full version of the film "Déchets - Le Cauchemar du Nucléaire", by Eric Guéret and Laure Noualhat (in French and German with English subtitles) is available online. ARTE-Editions has also published a 210-page book by Laure Noualhat with the same title (in French).
===========================
6. No Nukes News - Feb. 22, 2010
Uranium is the raw material of a power-elite who has taken Mother Earth’s every living creature hostage - The late Petra Kelly, German Green Party
Nobody Can Undo the Doo Doo from a Candu let alone contain it.
Tritium, the radioactive sibling of hydrogen, is created by fissioning inside a CANDU reactor. They use heavy water. Heavy water then becomes radioactive water. Chemically there is no way to separate radioactive water from stable water. Because Lake Ontario water provides the coolant water, it becomes populated with radioactive water before it is released back into the Lake. Lake Ontario is now a tritium dump. - Tim Seitz
----------------------------------------------------------------
Critics say Province is 'guessing' on Darlington price tag
Ontario Power Generation announced a reinvestment plan Tuesday which would see a $300 million upgrade to allow Pickering to run for approximately another decade, as well as the intention to refurbish the four reactors at Darlington, to extend their lifetime to about 2050. OPG officials say firm costs can't be known until preliminary studies, set to be carried out over the next four years, determine the scope of work to be completed during the refurbishment. Rough, very preliminary estimates indicate refurbishment of Darlington's four nuclear reactors, to extend their generation capability to about 2050, will cost $6 billion to $10 billion, says Infrastructure and Energy Minister Brad Duguid.
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/du ... cle/148621
Price should be public, MPP says
Ontario electricity customers have the right to know the sticker price on the refurbishment of the Darlington nuclear plant, NDP MPP Peter Tabuns says. "You don't make a multibillion-dollar decision based on a guess," Tabuns said Tuesday. "Either they're withholding numbers from the public or they're making a guess. In either case, that's indefensible."
http://www.intelligencer.ca/ArticleDisp ... ?e=2451845
Note: According to OPG’s news release, the restart of Pickering A Unit #1 was completed on time and on budget. This is not true! In 1999, OPG estimated that the total cost of returning Pickering A Unit #1 to service would be $213 million. Its actual cost was 4.8 times greater at $1.016 billion. Looks like OPG is up to its old tricks of deceiving the tax-paying public. If they want to upgrade Pickering and refurbish Darlington, they should be upfront with the costs – no more low-balling, leaving Ontario’s electricity consumers to cover the inevitable cost overruns. Ontario Energy Minister Brad Duguid should demand that the bids for the Pickering upgrade and Darlington refurbishment be a fixed-price one – that is, any cost overruns must not be passed on to Ontario’s electricity consumers or taxpayers. This is the rule that former Energy Minister George Smitherman established for the procurement process for two new nuclear reactors at Darlington. As a result Atomic Energy of Canada (AECL) was forced to submit an honest price bid that reflected the true cost. When Smitherman saw AECL’s honest $26 billion price tag, he had sticker shock and cancelled the procurement process.
Action: Please ask our new Energy Minister, Brad.Duguid@ontario.ca to protect consumers and taxpayers by applying the Smitherman Rule to the proposed Pickering B upgrade and the Darlington refurbishment – that is, both bids must be fixed-price – Ontario’s electricity consumers and taxpayers should not have to pay for nuclear cost overruns. (Please cc me.)
– angela@cleanairalliance.org
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of workers potentially exposed to radiation at Bruce nuclear plant: Watchdog
At least 217 workers at the Bruce Power nuclear plant northwest of Toronto were potentially exposed to a release of radiation last November, possibly the largest radioactive contamination in Canada, according to the country's national nuclear watchdog.
It is believed to be one of the largest mass exposures to radiation at a Canadian nuclear site.
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/natio ... ice=mobile
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/
Hundreds+workers+potentially+exposed+radiation+nuclear
+plant+Watchdog/2572560/story.html
Full test results for workers won't be ready for months
It will be another four months at least before all 192 workers who may have been exposed to dangerous radiation at the Bruce A nuclear plant in southern Ontario know whether their health has been jeopardized. Unusual levels of radioactive particles in the air were first detected on Nov. 26 and Nov. 28 as workers for the private consortium were refurbishing feeder pipes inside the vault of the dormant reactor. That work has now been halted.
http://www.nugget.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2456615
Alpha radiation surprise at Bruce
An incident that may have exposed hundreds of workers at Bruce Power to low levels of radiation has revealed an apparent gap in safety procedures at Canadian nuclear facilities.
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/Articl ... ?e=2456034
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario Power Generation confirms Pickering nuclear station to close in 10 years
Ontario Power Generation announced Tuesday that it will spend $300 million to keep the Pickering nuclear station open for another decade before it's mothballed, and will spend an undisclosed amount to refurbish the Darlington nuclear station.
Greenpeace Canada applauded Ontario Power Generation for admitting it was too costly to keep the Pickering nuclear station open for more than another 10 years. ``Today's announcement shows the cost estimates used to justify this government's commitment to nuclear power are not credible at all, and we should be revisiting the 2006 commitment to keep nuclear at 50 per cent of the supply over the long term,'' Stensil said. ``It'll bankrupt us if we implement that plan.''
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/
ontario-power-generation-confirms-pickering-nuclear-station-
to-close-in-10-years-84521182.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate: Eight Convenient Truths
By Amory B. Lovins
Electricity production is shifting rapidly and profoundly from giant coal- and gas-fired and nuclear plants to “micropower”—cogenerating electricity together with useful heat in factories and buildings, plus renewables (not counting big hydro dams).
There’s no business case for building nuclear plants—nor other central power plants.
To the surprise of many, nuclear power’s collapse is also good for climate protection. New nuclear plants could save carbon, but two to 20 times less per dollar, and 20 to 40 times less per year, than buying the market winners instead—micropower and efficiency. If greenhouse-gas emissions are a problem, we need the most solution per dollar and per year; anything less will reduce and retard climate protection. We need judicious, not indiscriminate, investment—best buys first. We don’t need everything, we can’t afford everything, and every dollar and year we spend on one choice excludes other choices.
http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Climate-+Eight+Convenient+Truths
------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Obama's Nuclear Bet Won't Pay Off
Eventually, extravagant government largesse might create a nuclear rebirth of sorts — but it might end up strangling better solutions in their cribs or prevent them from ever being born.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 46,00.html
Obama Pledges Billions for 20th Century's Most Expensive Technological Failure -- Nuclear Power
Obama has announced some $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for two new reactors planned for Georgia, which are unable to withstand natural cataclysms like hurricanes.
As Vermont seethes with radioactive contamination and the Democratic Party crumbles, Barack Obama has plunged into the atomic abyss.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/145718
Obama's latest bipartisan outreach: nuclear energy
http://www.sfexaminer.com/politics/ap/o ... 01797.html
Obama's nuclear power push faces obstacle: Waste
President Obama's announcement Tuesday of loan guarantees for nuclear power plants may encourage new construction, but a problem still remains that has plagued atomic energy for decades: what to do with nuclear waste?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/16/ ... /?hpt=Sbin
Barack Obama is going nuclear
By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now
From economics, to the environment, to the prevention of nuclear threats, Obama's nuclear loan guarantees fail on all counts.
http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/2010/02 ... ng-nuclear
Obama's Nuclear Boondoggle
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010 ... es-nuclear
------------------------------------------------------------------
Leak Continues at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant
Bad news continues to flow from the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. Levels of radioactive contamination are growing in several on-site wells at the power plant, according to the Vermont Department of Health (VDH). Vermont Senate vote on closing nuclear plant could come next week.
http://trueslant.com/oshagraydavidson/2010/02/18/
leak-continues-at-vermont-yankee-nuclear-power-plant/
VT Nuclear Plant Leaking- Industry Faces Concern Nationwide
As President Obama advocates expansion of America's nuclear power industry, pushing for billions of dollars in federal incentives and announcing plans to build the first nuclear plant in decades, a long-running facility in Vermont is leaking a cancer causing carcinogen. The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant is leaking possibly dangerous levels of tritium, a radioactive byproduct of the nuclear process.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/19/
vt-nuclear-plant-leaking-industry-faces-concern-nationwide/?test=latestnews
------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Power: No Answer to Climate Change
http://www.cane.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/
Why-nuclear-power-is-not-the-answer.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------
The impacts of uranium mining on indigenous communities
Uranium mining speculation lacks comprehensive health and safety regulations while the ethics of Canadian exported uranium, which can lead to depleted uranium used in zones of war, needs greater scrutiny. Abandoned uranium mines and the subsequent hazards experienced in forgotten communities have also been virtually ignored in Canada leading to tragic, unmitigated circumstances.
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op= ... 8041&mode=
thread&order=0&thold=0
------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsuccessful 'Fast Breeder' Is No Solution for Long-Term Reactor Waste Disposal Issues
After Over $50 Billion Spent by U.S., Japan, Russia, UK, India and France, No Commercial Model Found
High Cost, Unreliability, Major Safety Problems and Proliferation Risks All Seen as Major Barriers to Use
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/
report--unsuccessful-fast-breeder-is-no-solution-for-long-term-
reactor-waste-disposal-issues-84610032.html
Fourth generation nuclear power may not be the clean energy silver bullet
http://blogs.ft.com/energy-source/2010/02/18/
fourth-generation-nuclear-power-may-not-be-the-clean-energy-silver-bullet/
Pebble Bed Modular Reactor facing massive cuts
South Africa has stopped funding the development of the pebble bed modular reactor, leaving the project company looking at 75% cuts in staff.
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C_PBM ... 02101.html
Background: More evidence that the wheels are coming off the "nuclear renaissance" concept. When large reactors ran into financial roadblocks due to "sticker shock", many nuclear enthusiasts started touting small reactors as the answer, including the pebble bed reactor concept for Alberta's tar sands industry. Think again, folks. - Gordon Edwards.
------------------------------------------------------------------
10 surprisingly easy sources of alternative energy - Unconventional energy
Sure, you've heard of wind and solar power, biofuels, hydroelectric, tidal and wave power, but Mother Nature provides an endless bounty of alternative energy sources beyond those that we use today. Clean, green energy is all around us in the natural world, and scientists have only begun to answer the question of how to tap it. Here's a list of 10 practical sources of alternative energy you've probably never heard of.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/photos/
10-unconventional-alternative-energy-sources-youve-never-heard-3#image
------------------------------------------------------------------
WeConserveTV
The Conservation Council of Ontario is proud to announce that we will soon launch Canada's first video website devoted exclusively to conservation. Be one of the first to take part in our project by making a video to celebrate your project or identify your local challenge. Posting a video is easy! Simply follow the instructions www.weconservetv.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Energy taking off worldwide
The Global Wind Energy Council, a trade association based in Brussels, estimates that wind power capacity grew by 31 percent worldwide in 2009. According to the trade group, more than 500,000 people are now employed by the wind power industry around the world, and the market for wind turbine installations last year was worth about $63 billion.
http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/41025
------------------------------------------------------------------
Coal quickly losing power
Old King Coal should abdicate now, the Ontario Clean Air Alliance says.
Set to be shuttered by 2014, the province's four remaining coal-fired electricity generating plants could in fact be closed now, largely because the province is using less power than expected.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2 ... 38971.html
For more info: http://www.cleanairalliance.org/node/808
http://www.cleanairalliance.org/files/active/0/
phaseout%20progress%202010.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff
Outreach Director
Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402
Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
================================
7. Senate votes to close Vermont Yankee in 2012
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/288064
By Martin Laine. Feb. 24.10
Nuclear energy opponents cheered as the Vermont Senate today voted overwhelmingly against renewing the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant’s license to operate after 2012. Last minute efforts to delay the vote failed.
Even an offer by the plant’s parent company, Entergy Corp., of New Orleans, to sell electricity at a discounted rate for the next three years failed to change any minds.
After four hours of debate, the Senate voted 26-4 against recommending the renewal. The plant opened in 1972 with a license set to expire in 2012. Entergy had sought a 20-year extension.
Supporters had argued that the plant provides much-needed electricity to the state, as well as much-needed jobs. Until recently, it had appeared that lawmakers would go along with renewal but the discovery of leaking radioactive tritium at the Vernon, Vt., plant and the company’s less than forthright response caused many to change their minds.
Vermont is the only state in the nation where the legislature has a voice in the approval of nuclear power plant licenses. In other states, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other regulatory bodies hold that authority.
Today’s vote, while a setback to supporters, is most likely not the final word. Lawmakers can take up the matter again next year, after elections. And Entergy officials have threatened to sue the state if it does not approve the extension.
MORE: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/288064
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Vermont Senate Wants Entergy Reactor Shut in 2012
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/24-11
by Scott DiSavino Published on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 by Reuters
NEW YORK - The Vermont Senate said on Wednesday it has voted to shut Entergy Corp's Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant when its license expires in 2012, after a leak releasing radioactive tritium into the groundwater was discovered last month.
While the Obama administration advocates a nuclear revival to reduce dependency on foreign oil and greenhouse gas emissions, opponents of Vermont Yankee have used the leak to show Entergy is not operating the reactor safely and that it license should not be renewed.
Entergy applied with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2006 to renew the 40 year operating license for the plant, which began operations in 1972, for an additional 20 years.
"The effort to win a 20-year renewal of Vermont Yankee's operating license is far from over," Entergy said in a statement.
"We remain determined to prove our case to the legislature, state officials and the Vermont public."
If the vote is upheld, it would be the first time in more than 20 years that a state legislature has acted to shut down a reactor.
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/24-11
======================
8. Job posting: Editor/Publisher, Briarpatch Magazine
http://briarpatchmagazine.com/
Application deadline: March 1, 2010
Are you passionate about independent media and progressive/radical politics? Are you a talented communicator with an entrepreneurial spirit, ready to take the reins of a respected Canadian magazine? Do you want to work for a grassroots organization that enables you to put your politics into practice?
As part of a shift into participatory economics and balanced job complexes, Briarpatch seeks a crackerjack Editor/Publisher to jointly oversee all aspects of producing a bi-monthly magazine.
As one of two full-time staff in a horizontal workplace, the successful candidate will share equal responsibility for core editorial, organizational and administrative tasks, and will report directly to a volunteer board of directors.
Though no candidate is expected to have all of the following, the ideal candidate would have:
* excellent written communication skills, with experience in editing, journalism, graphic design, and/or creative/political writing;
* a grasp of anti-capitalist/anti-oppression/ecological politics and principles;
* a passion for independent media;
* a knowledge of and affinity for Briarpatch Magazine and its mandate;
* an ability to work independently and cooperatively and to juggle diverse responsibilities that range from organizational development to filing, from editorial and art direction to proofreading, and from long-term financial planning to data entry;
* experience administering a non-profit organization, preferably with publishing experience;
* strong computer skills, including familiarity with Microsoft Office (Word, Excel), Adobe Creative Suite, Simply Accounting, basic website maintenance and social media skills;
* a head for finance, numbers and small business management;
* a knack for fundraising and event organizing;
* a socially minded entrepreneurial spirit; and
* a wicked sense of humour.
Please note that the desire and ability to pick up new skills, and the ability to work well with existing employees and board members, are equally important as any of the above qualifications.
This is a full-time, unionized position; wage and benefits as per the collective agreement. The job is based in Regina, Saskatchewan, which is actually a great place to live. (We can provide references to that effect from others lured here by Briarpatch.)
Briarpatch particularly encourages applicants from diverse backgrounds and members of equity-seeking groups.
Please include in your application a cover letter, resume and short writing sample. Your cover letter should speak to your qualifications for and interest in this position.
Please email applications to givemeajob@briarpatchmagazine.com by March 1. Only those candidates chosen for an interview will be contacted.
About Briarpatch
Briarpatch Magazine is a non-profit bi-monthly publication. Fiercely independent and frequently irreverent, Briarpatch delves into today’s most pressing social and political issues from a radical, grassroots perspective, aiming always to challenge, inspire and empower its readers.
==========================
9. LETTER: Kurtenbach: Recession 2008
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1564#1564
February 23, 2010 5:23 PM
To the Editor,
In my last letter I wrote about Canada 's National Debt, and the cost of that debt which is borne by Canadian taxpayers.
However, there is an even greater financial cloud hanging over Canada. It is the astronomical debt of our neighbor --the USA.
After the great Depression of 1929, the American administration introduced the Glass/Steagall Act. It was designed to regulate the greedy wolves of Wall Street, but in the 1990's President Clinton repealed that Act.
Jack Cafferty, recently speaking on the Wolf Blitzer TV show, stated that the U.S. national debt is $14.6 trillion. Consumer Credit Card debt is estimated at $8 to 10 trillion. It is difficult to assess Corporate debt, but $15 trillion has been suggested. The annual budget deficit is $1.4 trillion Then there are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan expected to cost trillions of dollars, with Canadian troops now involved.
It's difficult [especially for this peasant] to find relevance to 1 trillion dollars. However, a professor with a PhD in math placed it in perspective for us: "If I gave you 1 trillion dollars in 1 dollar bills, and told you its all yours if you count each bill,-- you would be the sole owner after counting for about 32,000 years!"
Ben Bernanke, past chairman of the US Federal Reserve Bank, who recently was reappointed for another term by President Obama, stated he did not see this recession coming. Alan Greenspan, who retired in 2006 said the same. He was the spokesman for that group of gilded, greedy gurus on Wall Street, along with Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and others. They managed to convince the American Senate and the House of Representatives that the first monetary glitches due to the sale of derivatives and hedge funds -- a $27 trillion market -- or the fraud, would be taken care of by "the market". That statement was utter nonsense.
The first signs of a Wall Street and bank mess-up, around the year 2000, was brought to the attention of the U.S. administration by a young brilliant legal lady, named Brooksley Born. Government officials became concerned and appointed Born to head up of what became known as the Long Term Capital Management office. However, under pressure from powerful financial interests, Born was replaced by a new chairman who met the approval of the boys on Wall Street.
The rest is history. The Wall Street financial bubble finally burst in 2008. There were world-wide heavy losses sustained by many financial institutions and millions of smaller investors, but it also made a few investors a great deal wealthier, leaving the American taxpayers to clean up the mess, a mess which will also affect Canadians.
Leo Kurtenbach,
Box 268, Cudworth, Sask., S0K 1B0
Phone (306) 256 3638
=======================
10. Star Diamond Project - Fort a la Corne, Saskatchewan
http://www.shoregold.com/sdp.html
The Fort a la Corne area of Saskatchewan hosts one of the most extensive kimberlite fields in the world. Over 70 kimberlites exist in the Fort a la Corne province and over 70 percent of these have been shown to contain diamonds. The deposition and erosional history at Fort a la Corne is such that the crater portions of the volcanic eruptive events have been preserved and not scraped away by glaciation, as is the case with most kimberlites. As a result, the crater portion of the kimberlite has significant geographic extent. The Star kimberlite averages 88 meters in thickness and covers an area over four square kilometres. The kimberlite is covered by 90 meters of overburden, consisting mostly of sand, mudstone and glacial till. Shore was the first company in the Fort a la Corne district to locate a root zone beneath the kimberlite crater when drill hole Star 20 intersected 539 metres of continuous kimberlite. This is the longest intersection of continuous kimberlite from a vertical drill hole ever reported in North America.
Location and Access (Maps)
The Star Diamond project is located approximately 60 kilometres east of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, a major supply centre for Northern Saskatchewan. A paved highway, gravel road grid system, and an extensive network of forestry roads provide excellent year round access to Shore’s property. The Star Kimberlite is situated in a burned portion of the Fort a la Corne forest, 2 kilometres north of the Saskatchewan River and 21kilometres to the west of a 25 Kilovolt power line.
The project area consists of 45 contiguous mineral dispositions totaling 9,808 hectares and is 100% owned by Shore. The Company holds 395 claims covering 219,196 hectares.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Background:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1574#1574
==========================
11. ECOJUSTICE: Spring 2010 newsletter
Shows how our wins protect Canada’s wildlife and Canadians’ environmental rights.
Supreme Court of Canada win protects public voice
Endangered turtles get helping hand
Securing rights to a healthy environment
...and many more! Read them here
Recent publications
Ecojustice creates free, online legal and scientific reports that critically examine the latest environmental problems and offer concrete solutions.
In our first bilingual report, uOttawa-Ecojustice lawyer Will Amos puts citizens and the environment first in calling for Quebec mining law reform.
More reports...
For the latest updates, check our blog
The Ecojustice blog provides up-to-date results on our work and opportunities for you to take action on Canada’s most pressing environmental issues. Check out our recent entries:
Ecojustice wins at the Supreme Court of Canada
Tasked with a death watch
Climate battles to the courts
============================
12. WATCH: Tom Brokaw video a U.S. 'love letter' to Canada
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Brokaw+vid ... er+Canada/
2598965/story.html
By Laura Stone, Canwest News Service February 22, 2010
==============================
13. Greenpeace SUCKS!!
http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/306350
Feb 19, 2007
As much as in-fighting amongst groups sucks and should be discouraged sometimes someone totally oversteps the mark and just takes the piss. And can it really be called in-fighting if the groups in question seem to have very different objectives?
Taken from the Sea Shepherd website.
Greenpeace Eats Whales to "Save" Them
Greenpeace has gone over the line this time in betraying the whales.
The Greenpeace Foundation has launched a bizarre and contradictory campaign to "save" the whales. This week on Valentine's Day, Greenpeace hit the road in Japan with the strangely named "Whale Love Wagon."
The campaign opened by asking supporters to send a fax transmission to the Antarctic whaling fleet saying, "I love Japan but whaling breaks my heart."
The Greenpeace attitude is that if they can't beat them, then they should join them. And in doing so, Greenpeacers have betrayed the whales. They are eating them.
In promoting their theme that Japanese whale eating culture must be respected, a video distributed by Greenpeace depicts a Greenpeacer visiting a Japanese grandmother in her home. He sits down and eats whale with her, and politely tells her that is was delicious.
"We are making it very clear that we have no problem with Japanese culture or eating whale," said Emiliano Ezcurra, an Argentinian Greenpeace activist who helped design the campaign.
Ezcurra said that Greenpeace has no problem with whaling on Japan's coast but opposes the slaughter of the whales in the Southern Oceans Whale Sanctuary.
Sea Shepherd Founder and President Captain Paul Watson, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace is appalled at the pro-whaling stance of Greenpeace. "This campaign is just simply bizarre," said Captain Watson, "How does Greenpeace think they are going to stop whaling in Antarctica by publicly eating whale meat and declaring whale meat to be delicious? What are these people thinking?"
This is not the first time that Greenpeace has betrayed the whales. In 1997, they assisted in a Yupik whale hunt by towing a dead bowhead whale ashore and ate whale meat as guests of the community.
Greenpeace International Director John Frizell has openly stated that Greenpeace is not opposed to whaling in principle.
MORE: http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/306350
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Greenpeace Greenwash
http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/story/2765
Greenpeace International hires torchbearer Tzeporah Berman as chief climate campaigner
by Macdonald Stainsby →2010 Olympics Environment February 15, 2010
As the world turned their attention to the spectacle of the 2010 Olympics, Greenpeace International played another kind of game, appointing Tzeporah Berman as their new energy and climate campaign director. As a result, she will inherit their “Stop the Tar Sands” campaign and take responsibility for 110 Greenpeace climate campaigners in 28 countries. In the last few years Berman has been known to accommodate corporate interests, provided they make minor concessions and release joint statements. Greenpeace itself, by teaming with Olympic corporate sponsor Coca-Cola, has made clear this strategy also falls within their overall corporate strategy.
Berman, a former a Greenpeace BC campaigner, was recently appointed to the BC Liberal government as an “adviser” on free market-based “green energy” initiatives. She immediately conferred an award to BC Premier Gordon Campbell’s “leadership” in fighting climate change while at the Copenhagen negotiations. This, even though BC was the only province in Canada whose tally of greenhouse gas emissions for the year 2009 was higher than the year before. While Berman was on the inside at Copenhagen handing an award to Premier Campbell (whom she now worked for), tens of thousands of activists calling for real action on climate change were being arrested, beaten and tear gassed. According to the Vancouver Sun, Berman “decided to apply for the job after reconnecting with Greenpeace representatives at the Copenhagen climate conference last December.” Her decision came roughly the same time as Greenpeace International was releasing their statement with Coca-Cola.
MORE: http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/story/2765
Also in Environment:
The Tar Sands Oilympics
Land disputes continue despite Olympics
D.O.A. - Talk - Action = Zero. an interview with Mr. Shithead.
Members of Coast Salish Katzie First Nation, supporters block Golden Ears Bridge
Opening Shenanigans
Greenpeace Greenwash
Balaclava! VMC Olympic Broadsheet, issue 5
Its all garbage! EH whad!
2010 Photo Lens: Heart Attack!!
Balaclava! VMC Olympic Broadsheet, issue 4
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ACTION ALERT! Is Greenpeace International set to become Greenpeace Electric?
http://canadianclimateaction.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/
action-alert-is-greenpeace-international-set-to-become-greenpeace-electric/
“One of the truest tests of integrity is its blunt refusal to be compromised.” – Chinua Achebe Nigerian Writer
First the tcktcktck scandal and now this
The recent decision by Greenpeace International to hire Tzeporah Berman to direct its global climate and energy campaign could be the most disastrous decision for Greenpeace ever made. It is quite possible that this move may destroy the organizations reputation in such a damaging way it may never recover. The current economic system has caused us to have entered into what Dr. E.O. Wilson describes as ‘the sixth extinction’ – a phrase that many scientists are now using. We now face climate catastrophe on a dying planet already well on the pathway to a 6C temperature rise which will kill off most life. This recent appointment of Tzeporah Berman could be the greatest threat climate change justice has yet to face. Who is Tzeporah Berman anyway? Tzeporah Berman could be described as a Trojan horse for the biggest corporations on the planet. She has successfully entrenched her way into the position of bargaining away nature to the corporations, under the guise of an environmentalist. Perhaps this is a seemingly much better strategy than just having Pat Moore “ex-Greenpeace” running around supporting the corporations. The corporations have finally succeeded in placing a compromised ‘environmentalist’ into the very heart of Greenpeace – the most recognized environmental organization on the planet.
The day after Tzeporah Berman announced her new Greenpeace role, she walked into an exclusive General Electric (GE) banquet (past the real environmental protesters) and delivered a speech supporting the privatization of some 600 rivers in British Columbia, Canada, for the benefit of GE and their subsidiaries and partners. So there was Greenpeace (not officially, of course, but in the public mind) endorsing the wholesale surrender of our environment to one of the most predatory corporations on the planet – GE has paid fines for illegal weapons trade fraud, money laundering, etc.
MORE:
http://canadianclimateaction.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/
action-alert-is-greenpeace-international-set-to-become-greenpeace-electric/
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 26.10
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:32 am
NUKE NEWS: Feb. 26.10
Compilation:
1. Sustainability Fair! March 01, 2010
2. Cameco Community Investment Report
3. No Nukes News - Feb. 26, 2010
4. VERMONT SENATE VOTES TO CLOSE VERMONT YANKEE
5. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 26, 2010
6. Nuclear Subsidies Put Taxpayers at Risk
7. No deal‚ on burying nuclear waste
8. Environmental Defence Canada GreenNews – Feb. 25, 2010
9. Council of Canadians E-News – February 2010
10. Bloom Box Helps Companies Reduce Electricity Costs
===========================
1. Sustainability Fair! March 01, 2010
Presented by U of R Campion College Environmental Sustainability Committee
In the Campion College Commons, University of Regina Campus – March 1, 2010 – 10:00 – 3:00 p.m.
Learn and celebrate what various organizations on campus and in our community are doing to promote sustainability
Evening Presentation: The Nuclear Debate in Saskatchewan
Location: Campion College Chapel (2nd Floor)
Time: March 1 - 7:30 p.m.
The Nuclear Debate in SK Across the Generations
Jim Harding, Brett Dolter, and Katherine Arbuthnott
- - - -
Wherever it is promoted, the nuclear industry is a flash point for debate and SK is no exception. Recently the provincial government proposed an extensive set of recommendations to expand the nuclear industry and opened a public consultation process on the issue. Thirty years ago a very similar debate occurred in the province. In the context of four key themes of the debate, environmental health, weapons connection, energy policy, and economics, the speakers will describe research on the public response to nuclear expansion in the two time periods. A generation ago, the 1980s uranium inquiries showed a public paradigm shift from scienctism to sustainability, and the recent public consultations revealed the evolution of this shift in vision and values underlying the debate in Saskatchewan.
http://www.campioncollege.sk.ca/news-an ... &year=2010
=============================
2. Cameco Community Investment Report
http://www.cameco.com/responsibility/community/
Click on Link on the top right-hand corner
=========================
3. No Nukes News - Feb. 26, 2010
Slow economy leaves Ontario ample power
System regulator says unprecedented array of electricity options offers nuclear wiggle room
Stevens said new generation will likely be needed after 2018, but there's no reason it needs to be nuclear. "We could build a new nuclear plant, or we could build more wind and gas plants," he said.
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
770407--slow-economy-leaves-ontario-ample-power
----------------------------------------------------------------
10 ideas that could save the planet
#1. SHUT DOWN COAL-FIRED PLANTS
We’re already producing 23 per cent more electricity than peak demand forecast for this summer. And 27 per cent more power than peak demand forecast for the summer of 2014, according to a report released this week by the Ontario Clean Air Alliance. You’ve read this right. We have energy to burn, minus the coal currently choking our lungs. A coal shutdown can be accomplished without brownouts or spending millions on dangerous nukes, but we do have to commit to stop selling our surplus power to the U.S. when the economy picks up. Cancelling coal isn’t far-fetched. All it’ll take is a champion in the Liberal cabinet.
http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=173819
------------------------------------------------------------------
Excuse Me, But That Nuclear Plant Has Its Hand On Your Wallet
What's the worst thing that could happen? Plane crash, deliberate or accidental? Earthquake? Design flaw? Construction flaw? Operator error? What's the potential damage in dollars? How about $600 billion, according to the Sandia National Laboratory.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gsi ... y_id=57400
Note: In Canada we have the Nuclear Liability Act which insures the nuclear industry against accidents up to a max. of $75 million. What a deal! No other industry is able to operate without insurance. For more on this see: http://www.ccnr.org/insurance.html –a
----------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont Senate Votes to Close Nuclear Plant
In an unusual state foray into nuclear regulation, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 Wednesday to block operation of the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant after 2012, citing radioactive leaks, misstatements in testimony by plant officials and other problems. Unless the chamber reverses itself, it will be the first time in more than 20 years that the public or its representatives has decided to close a reactor.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/25 ... 012&st=cse
----------------------------------------------------------------
Look out for the nuclear bomb coming with your electric bill
Higher electric rates will appear, not when plants begin operating, but years, if not decades, before they come on line.
http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/
look-out-for-the-nuclear-bomb-coming-with-your-electric-bill/
----------------------------------------------------------------
Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama's Nuclear Power Proposal
"When Wall Street won't invest in something, that should tell you how bad it is." "[Nuclear energy] is the most socialized energy in the world and would not exist except for public money."
http://www.truthout.org/
major-fallout-predicted-over-obamas-nuclear-power-proposal57088
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear power is too risky
If our nation wants to reduce global warming, air pollution and energy instability, we should invest only in the best energy options. Nuclear energy isn't one of them.
Every dollar spent on nuclear is one less dollar spent on clean renewable energy and one more dollar spent on making the world a comparatively dirtier and a more dangerous place, because nuclear power and nuclear weapons go hand in hand.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/02/22/
jacobson.nuclear.power.con/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tritium Awareness Project
TAP aims to raise awareness about tritium, demystify the nature of this dangerous material for public and politicians alike, tighten standards and reduce emissions and exposures of Canadians to tritium. Tritium is a serious hazard in Canada, requiring urgent action by the public and legislators alike. On this website you will find scientific documents, media reports, personal stories and fact sheets.
http://www.tapcanada.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chernobyl Legacy
Photo Essay on Chernobyl by Paul Fusco
http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/chernobyl
----------------------------------------------------------------
Corporate Media Are Using Industry Talking Points to Lie to Us About Nuclear Power
The media should reject the use of industry rhetoric, stop using Nukespeak talking points, and start telling us the truth about nuclear power!
http://www.alternet.org/media/145792/
corporate_media_are_using_industry_talking_points_to_lie_
to_us_about_nuclear_power
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Files
The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation initiates and supports worldwide efforts to abolish nuclear weapons, to strengthen international law and institutions, and to inspire and empower a new generation of peace leaders.
http://www.nuclearfiles.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------
Top 6 nuclear energy myths exposed
http://www.mnn.com/technology/research- ... hs-exposed
------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeing the wind
Wind power has never been this big in Canada. And the Great Lakes are a superb site, getting the maximum wind exposure without building towers in people's backyards.
The launch of a wave of new wind farms in Ontario will create long-term opportunities for manufacturers to supply them -- and replace some of the jobs that the auto industry can no longer provide. There was a time when the Seaway carried iron ore and car parts. As demand for that traditional cargo falls, perhaps the same waters could supply jobs from energy.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology ... d/2600263/
story.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
Tritium In the River
to the tune of "Take me to the River"
---
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water.
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water, water.
I don't know why this nuke is online
All the trouble that it puts us through.
Takes our money, gives us cancer.
We haven't seen the worst of it yet.
I want it closed, can you hear me?
Shut it down today?
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water, water...
------------------------------------------------------------------
THE POWER OF COMMUNITY: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil
Free film screening and discussion
A film on how Cuba responded to the challenges of peak oil in the 90's followed by a discussion on creating a more local, low-energy society and addressing the challenges of climate change in our own neighbourhood.
Tuesday, March 2nd at 6:30 pm
Annette Street Branch Library, 145 Annette St. (E of Pacific, W of Keele), Community Room 1, Toronto
Organized by Green 13, Hosted by Annette Branch Library
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, Cuba's economy went into a tailspin. With imports of oil cut by more than half and food by 80 percent people were desperate. This film tells of the hardships and struggles as well as the community and creativity of the Cuban people during this difficult time. Cubans share how they transitioned from a highly mechanized, industrial agricultural system to one using organic methods of farming and local, urban gardens. It is an unusual look into the Cuban culture during this economic crisis, which they call "The Special Period." The film opens with a short history of Peak Oil, a term for the time in our history when world oil production will reach its all-time peak and begin to decline forever. Cuba, the only country that has faced such a crisis the massive reduction of fossil fuels is an example of options and hope.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Global Governance and the Future of Nuclear Energy
Wed. Mar, 3, 2 p.m.
At the Monk Centre, University of Toronto
Speaker: Louise Frachette, Distinguished Fellow, Centre for International Governance Innovation
For more info and to register: http://webapp.mcis.utoronto.ca/EventDet ... entid=8744
------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff
Outreach Director
Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402
Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
========================
4. VERMONT SENATE VOTES TO CLOSE VERMONT YANKEE
LEGISLATURES IN WEST VIRGINIA AND ARIZONA DEFEAT PRO-NUCLEAR MEASURES - THE TIDE IS TURNING.....KEEP UP YOUR EFFORTS
February 26, 2010
Dear Friends,
First, thank you to everyone who participated in yesterday's National Call-Congress Day! We received a lot of reports back from people; if you haven't sent in a quick report, please do.
We'll be continuing to put pressure on Congress to prevent a tripling of the nuclear reactor loan program, and we hope you'll continue to help: when we all speak together, our impact is great.
A reminder: if you haven't yet written to your Senators this week, please do so here. And if you haven't yet written your House member this week, please do so here. And please make sure your family members and friends have the opportunity to send in their letters as well.
Now the good news! The nuclear industry may think it's on the verge of a revival, but the people of the United States are saying something very different!
In Vermont on Tuesday, the State Senate voted 26-4 to close the Vermont Yankee reactor when its license expires in 2012. That's a huge victory, but one that will need to be protected over the coming months since no one is foolish enough to believe the Entergy Corporation is just going to slink home. Here is a statement from Citizens Awareness Network on the vote.
Yesterday in West Virginia, a bill to repeal that state's ban on new nuclear construction was defeated in the state legislature. Although the bill had already passed the Senate's Energy and Mining Committee, it received only one vote in the Judiciary Committee and is now dead for the year.
And yesterday in Arizona, a bill to classify nuclear power as renewable energy was withdrawn following heavy lobbying from the solar power industry and environmental community.
Congratulations to everyone in those states who worked on those issues.
If Washington and the nuclear industry think they can shove nuclear power down the throats of Americans and make us pay for it at the same time, they'd better think again. The tide is turning: if we all keep it up and keep this movement growing, we really can build the nuclear-free, carbon-free energy future our planet requires.
We'll soon let you know the next steps you can take. In the meantime, thank you again for all your work and activism. It is essential.
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
Check out the networking site for grassroots anti-nuclear activists: http://grassrootsnucleus.ning.com/
==========================
5. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 26, 2010
Top Stories
Vermont Vote Signals Nuclear Retreat and Sets Precedent for Other States' Action
Background: In a roll call the Vermont State Senate voted 26 to 4 to block federal relicensing of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant operated by its parent company Entergy Nuclear. The vote is an overwhelming statement of "no confidence" in both the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) 20-year relicensing process and the continued operation of nuclear power in Vermont beyond the reactor's current 40-year license which expires on March 12, 2012. Beyond Nuclear hailed the state vote to shutter the aging reactor as a victory for local democracy and a beacon for other states to assert more control over radioactive trespasses by the nuclear industry.
Our View: Vermont is now at the forefront of a fight to rein in an undemocratic technology and a promotionally biased licensing process. The vote is precedent setting. Vermont has said it is not in the best interest of a state to allow nuclear plants to operate without a waste disposal plan, with insufficient radioactive cleanup funds and shielded by shell corporations hiding behind limited liability firewalls. The vote offers an example for companion initiatives in other states.
The examples of the undemocratic impositions thrust upon states and community hosts by nuclear power technology are many. One particularly egregious affront is extending operating the nuclear reactor licenses and nuclear waste generation without any scientifically approved long-term environmental management plan and the repeated denial by the NRC to allow public hearings on the issue in its new licensing and relicensing process. Reactor sites like Vermont Yankee are de facto indefinite nuclear waste storage facilities at best and possibly permanent radioactive dumps that were never environmentally qualified as such for either an original 40-year license or 20-year license renewal proceedings. Vermonters voted "no confidence" in the Entergy Nuclear effort to spin off continued operational costs and ultimately its decommissioning commitment for atomic cleanup and site deconstruction to a shell corporation (Enexus) where industry is establishing Limited Liability Corporations as a common business practice with the consolidation of more reactors into fewer parent nuclear corporations. Similarly, the vote shows "no confidence" in the NRC and throws a legal blockade in front of a federal relicensing proceeding. The NRC sees no nexus between the uncontrolled and still undiscovered radioactive leaks at Vermont Yankee and the public's health and safety. The NRC relicensing process has failed to capture or address the aging buried pipes now leaking.
What You Can Do: Celebrate and hold up the banner of Vermont's democracy in action. Contact Beyond Nuclear on how you can educate your community and your state representatives and start work on similar initiatives. Additional examples of the nuclear industry retreat from its much touted "renaissance" can be viewed on the Beyond Nuclear website at http://www.beyondnuclear.org/the-nuclear-retreat/
Kazakhstan and Niger: nuclear power is the antithesis of energy independence
Background: On the heels of President Obama's announcement to increase the United States' reliance nuclear energy as part of his plan for a energy independence, the Washington Post published its story on the growing political instability mushrooming in Kazakhstan, one of the world's largest known uranium reserves, where the United States, China, Russia, Japan and Canada are among those jockeying for control of this valued and dangerous uranium ore.
Meanwhile, the February 18, 2010 military coup in the sub-Saharan nation of Niger raises as many questions as answers about the African country's future. While uranium mining makes up the bulk of Niger's foreign income, 80% of its population lives on subsistence farming with 60% below the poverty level amidst recurring famines. Coup leaders have made a pledge to bring democracy to the resource rich but impoverished country. However, international intrigue and conflicts continues to brew here as the French monopoly of uranium mining is being challenged by China.
Our View: Nuclear power is the antithesis of "energy independence" as claimed by the industry. The emerging conflicts in Kazakhstan and Niger illuminate how continued and expanded reliance on uranium power comes at the expense of future resource conflicts, human domination and environmental predation and injustice. In fact, the keys to real energy independence are found in substantially expanding energy efficiency, conservation and expanded renewable energy programs.
Register now for Alliance for Nuclear Accountability's annual "DC Days"!
Background: Beyond Nuclear is a proud member of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA), a coalition of dozens of groups across the country with over 20 years of experience. A highlight of ANA's year is its annual "DC Days," four days of advocacy and training about nuclear weapons and power issues! At DC Days, you will learn from experts and maximize your impact, meet with Members of Congress or their staff and Administration officials, and network with activists from across the country. And, just as in previous years, DC Days participants will work to: oppose nuclear power and address radioactive waste concerns; increase funding and improve environmental cleanup standards at Dept. of Energy (DOE) weapons complex sites; oppose new nuclear bomb production plants; prevent the dirty, dangerous and expensive reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel; promote safer solutions for plutonium disposal; stop research and development of new nuclear weapons; create a fair and comprehensive waste cleanup plan at contaminated DOE sites; support Nuclear Non-proliferation (especially important this year, with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference coming up in May); and support long-term environmental protection at DOE sites. See ANA's website for more information about DC Days.
Our View: While many of ANA's member groups live in the shadows of DOE weapons complex sites, and devote themselves to watch-dogging them, Beyond Nuclear is honored to bring nuclear power watch-dogging expertise to the coalition. For this reason, we encourage all Beyond Nuclear supporters to consider attending this year's ANA DC Days, to add yet more anti-nuclear power activism to one of the best "lobby days" to take place in Washington D.C. each year. One of the best parts of all are the parties, an informal one for networking with fellow activists, and a formal one for awarding Members of Congress, journalists, Administration officials, and the activist of the year for exemplary efforts to address nuclear issues.
What You Can Do: Register now with ANA to attend DC Days. ANA's DC Days intern, Dan Yoken, stands ready to help you find low cost flights and affordable lodging. Some home stays are also available. Dan's email is dyoken@ananuclear.org, while his phone number is (202) 544-0217 ext. 2501. Kevin Kamps at Beyond Nuclear can also help answer your questions about ANA DC Days.
Added Bonus: In addition, DC Days will be preceded by an important grassroots meeting about high-level radioactive waste policy in the U.S. in light of the demise of the Yucca Mountain dumpsite proposal and formation of Energy Secretary Chu's blue ribbon commission seeking a "Plan B" radioactive waste policy. The all-day meeting will be held on Saturday, March 13th, and will begin at 10 a.m. with coffee at the office of Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Suite 340, 6930 Carroll Ave., in Takoma Park, Maryland 20912. Mary Olson of NIRS has written about the agenda for this meeting, as well as other ways folks can take part in high-level radioactive waste activism. Phone Kevin Kamps, (240) 462-3216, to learn more about the radioactive waste meeting. We hope you can join us for both the radioactive waste meeting, as well as ANA DC Days!
Beyond Nuclear In the News
Beyond Nuclear is quoted in the Toledo Blade on Obama's nuclear power position.
Paul Gunter was featured in Rutland Herald coverage of a pivotal Feb. 21st anti-Vermont Yankee rally held in Brattleboro.
Paul Gunter was also featured in Brattleboro Reformer coverage of the same rally.
Kevin Kamps was quoted in the London, England Morning Star objecting to President Obama's awarding of $8.3 billion in taxpayer-backed nuclear loan guarantees to Southern Nuclear for constructing two new reactors of the flawed Toshiba-Westinghouse AP1000 design.
Sign our letter to President Obama
Please consider signing our letter to president Obama on our website urging him to oppose nuclear power in climate legislation. Despite his statements supporting new reactor construction, the president must hear a clear and unequivocal message of opposition from the electorate that brought him to power. Please sign today. We will deliver the letter as soon as the climate bill is on the legislative agenda.
=======================
6. Nuclear Subsidies Put Taxpayers at Risk
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/25-4
Published on Thursday, February 25, 2010 by The Boston Globe
by Michael Kranish
WASHINGTON - President Obama's plan to kick-start the construction of nuclear power plants in the United States comes with a big catch: Because private banks won't lend to an industry viewed as financially risky, taxpayers would be accountable for billions in government-guaranteed loans if plant developers default.
Precisely how much risk the public would carry remains a subject of lobbying by the industry, which is trying to minimize its financial exposure as the political climate in Washington has warmed in its favor.
Obama said last week that his administration had conditionally awarded a loan guarantee for the construction of two nuclear reactors at a plant in Georgia and said he wants to fund many more such projects under a program that could exceed $50 billion. But critics said the president has failed to address the potential liability to taxpayers for such loans.
"There is a huge potential risk for taxpayers,'' said Autumn Hanna, who analyzes federal loan guarantees at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonparti san group. She said the risk could be in the tens of billions of dollars and said the public shouldn't be asked to assume responsibility banks are unwilling to take.
To reduce taxpayer risk, the Obama administration wants nuclear companies to pay fees into a government-managed insurance fund to back the loans. But the administration has not said how large the premiums should be, and power companies are lobbying for the lowest possible rate to keep the program economically feasible. Suggestions have ranged from fees of 1 percent to 25 percent of the loan.
The nuclear industry, while acknowledging that taxpayer dollars will be at risk, said the downsides will be minimized by a combination of factors, including new, safer reactor designs that will enable companies to deliver projects on time and on budget.
"Of course there's risk; there's risk in any project,'' said Leslie Kass, senior director of business policy and programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's lobbying group. "But it is a calculated risk, and we think it is a low risk.''
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/25-4
========================
7. No deal‚ on burying nuclear waste
http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/barrow/no ... Path=news/
Last updated at 13:12, Friday, 26 February 2010
BURYING highly radioactive waste underground in Copeland to solve one of the nation‚s biggest problems is not a done deal.
Copeland Borough Council leader, councillor Elaine Woodburn, told a meeting there had been no discussion with the government for the borough to accept a repository.
It was stressed at Tuesday’s (23) West Cumbria Managing Radioactive Waste Safely Partnership meeting that Copeland, Allerdale and Cumbria County Council had only expressed an interest into the possibility of “hosting” a deep underground repository.
The partnership is giving information and advice to the three councils on whether West Cumbria should proceed to the next stage with government.
This is when the Nuclear Decommissioning will look at social, economic and environmental criteria needed to identify potentially suitable disposal sites.
Cllr Woodburn said: “The geological facility would have an important effect on people living in the county particularly West Cumbria for many generations to come. We want everyone to have the chance to help us decide whether we should continue talking to the government about the possibility of locating the facility in this area.”
County council cabinet member, councillor Tim Knowles, said: “We want to be completely satisfied that locating the facility will be in the best interests of the area and is supported by local people before final decisions are made. We are a long way from being able to do that yet.”
MORE:
http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/barrow/no ... Path=news/
====================
8. Environmental Defence Canada GreenNews – Feb. 25, 2010
https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:CampaignPublic/
id:36689.8034524465/rid:a6be5293c1dc58881ab7c02f0dbd5f98#Story1
Slow Death by Rubber Duck: How the Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Life Affects Our Health
Rick Smith and Bruce Lourie, with Sarah Dopp (Knopf Canada)
This eco-bible also happens to have one of the most memorable titles of the year. Slow Death by Rubber Duck is the result of a two-year experiment by a pair of environmental researchers who took the Super Size Me approach to investigating environmental pollutants, measuring the level of toxins in their own bodies from exposure to everyday products. The result is a chilling reminder of the toxicity of modern life, as well as a call to action. "The stunt science … may be the book’s key feature, but what really stands out is the solid writing," wrote Q&Q reviewer Louise Fabiani. "Considering how undeniably depressing their findings are, the authors manage to stay this side of apocalyptic without sounding flippant. Not only is the book scary, it’s hard to put down."
Get your very own Slow Death By Rubber Duck!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Groups Speak Up About Lawsuits Designed to Muzzle
More than 60 Ontario groups released a letter (.pdf) to Premier McGuinty asking him to move ahead with a new law to protect citizens from lawsuits designed to stifle legitimate public participation. Such suits are often called strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs.
Many of the 60 signatories to the letter, including Environmental Defence, have experience with a SLAPP, which can put victims in the position of either backing down or losing everything. The Province of Quebec and half of the U.S. states already have laws in place to protect people from SLAPPs.
You can take action by signing our petition to stop SLAPPs.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Quebecers Concerned About Global Warming, Despite Oil Sands Money
A poll we conducted last week found the majority of Quebec residents surveyed are less likely to vote for the current government because of the Prime Minister's policies on global warming. It also shows that the appointment of a Quebec MP to oversee the Natural Resources ministry, which is the federal government's main presence on oil and gas issues in Canada, won’t change the majority of people’s negative views of the oil sands. They also disagreed that they should accept increased global warming pollution due to money received from the oil sands in Alberta.
You can read the complete poll on our website (.pdf)
========================
9. Council of Canadians E-News – February 2010
http://www.canadians.org/publications/subscribe/enews/
2010/February.html
Go here to see our action alert.
Harper’s ‘Buy American’ plan bad deal for Canadians
Last week the Council of Canadians, along with the Canadian Union of Public Employees, leaked a copy of the Canada-U.S. Agreement on government procurement (the "Buy American" deal) to the media. It was the first time the wide-sweeping deal, which will permanently constrain provincial spending options in many areas, had been put forward for public scrutiny. This deal binds the provinces to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules on public spending – something they had been unwilling to do until now, for very good reasons.
Despite a flurry of protests from the public, civil society groups and labour organizations, and criticisms of the deal in the national media, International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan announced last week that the provinces had approved the text of the agreement, which has been sent to Geneva for inclusion in Canada's WTO commitments. It was signed without public consultation, and with parliament prorogued, no opportunity for questions or debate in the House of Commons. Groups opposing it say it gives little to no benefit to Canadians and forbids the provinces from including "buy local" or "buy Canadian" provisions on government contracts in many areas, notably in the construction of new public infrastructure, where previously local incentives would have been allowed. Such conditions on public spending are under-used in Canada but have proven effective where they exist in creating local jobs and boosting local or provincial economies.
As Council of Canadians Trade Campaigner Stuart Trew argues in a recent trade blog, the deal will not guarantee Canadian companies substantial new access to U.S. government contracts, and it will permanently restrict the flexibility of the provinces and territories to use procurement as a public policy tool by making the financial bottom-line the only consideration when spending public money, and then enforcing it legally through the WTO. “This is a case where the devil is not in the details — it’s in the principle that free trade dogma should dictate all government policy at all levels, even down to how your local town council spends money,” explains Trew.
We are encouraging people to continue contacting their MPPs and MLAs to voice opposition to this deal. Go here to see our action alert.
To read more about the Buy American deal go here.
To watch a video of Trade Campaigner Stuart Trew argue the merits of the deal on the Business News Network show Squeezeplay go here.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Watch the preview for the new documentary Water on the Table
A new social issue documentary by filmmaker Liz Marshall is set to be released this spring. The film chronicles some of the work of Council of Canadians National Chairperson Maude Barlow and her efforts as an “international water-warrior.” It asks the question: Is water a commercial good like running shoes or Coca-Cola? Or, is water a human right like air? Using strong visuals and a personal narrative, the documentary highlights Maude’s work to have water recognized as a human right at the United Nations, to stop the Site 41 landfill in Simcoe County, and to raise awareness about the devastating environmental impacts of the tar sands in northern Alberta.
The film will be broadcast by TV Ontario on March 24, and may be more widely available later this spring.
Go here to watch a preview of Water on the Table.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Why the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan must divest from privatized water in Chile
The Council of Canadians is calling on Ontario teachers to rethink their investment plans in Chile’s privatized water industry.
Last month, National Chairperson Maude Barlow sent a letter to the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan – jointly run by the Ontario Teachers’ Federation and the Ontario government – calling on shareholders to demand a higher ethical standard for their pension investments and to stop investing in private, for-profit water services in Chile.
In 1998 the Chilean government decided to privatize water services. Within a decade, Chile went from almost entirely publicly-run water services to 97 per cent private services. Water rates rose substantially and many families had their water services cut-off when they couldn’t afford to pay the inflated bills. Workers lost jobs and water quality standards diminished.
“Ontario teachers support the fight for public water services in the province and teach their students about the urgent need to support the right to water around the world. So how is it possible that Ontario teachers are represented by a pension fund that betrays these efforts, and supports a private water services industry in Chile that is undermining the right to safe, clean public water in that country?” asked Barlow.
To read the Council’s media release on this issue go here.
To read more about this issue go here. If you are a teacher, or a former teacher, please click here to sign the petitition calling on the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan to divest from private water in Chile.
=======================
10. Bloom Box Helps Companies Reduce Electricity Costs
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20100222/tc_nf/71799
Barry Levine, newsfactor.com Barry Levine, newsfactor.com – Mon Feb 22, 2:33 pm ET
- - - -
WATCH: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khK_QTWl ... re=related
- - - -
Your business probably already uses Wi-Fi for wirelessly connecting laptops in your office, and employees' cell phones are replacing landlines. Now a new energy-in-a-box technology could let your business disconnect from the electrical grid as well.
While many new technologies for untangling businesses and consumers from power lines are emerging, one called the Bloom Box has been receiving a lot of attention recently -- including a feature piece on Sunday's 60 Minutes. The fuel-cell technology, from Bloom Energy in Silicon Valley, Calif., adapts NASA technology to create a clean-energy powerplant in a box that is now being used by several large corporations, including Google, Federal Express, Wal-Mart and eBay.
MORE: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20100222/tc_nf/71799
Compilation:
1. Sustainability Fair! March 01, 2010
2. Cameco Community Investment Report
3. No Nukes News - Feb. 26, 2010
4. VERMONT SENATE VOTES TO CLOSE VERMONT YANKEE
5. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 26, 2010
6. Nuclear Subsidies Put Taxpayers at Risk
7. No deal‚ on burying nuclear waste
8. Environmental Defence Canada GreenNews – Feb. 25, 2010
9. Council of Canadians E-News – February 2010
10. Bloom Box Helps Companies Reduce Electricity Costs
===========================
1. Sustainability Fair! March 01, 2010
Presented by U of R Campion College Environmental Sustainability Committee
In the Campion College Commons, University of Regina Campus – March 1, 2010 – 10:00 – 3:00 p.m.
Learn and celebrate what various organizations on campus and in our community are doing to promote sustainability
Evening Presentation: The Nuclear Debate in Saskatchewan
Location: Campion College Chapel (2nd Floor)
Time: March 1 - 7:30 p.m.
The Nuclear Debate in SK Across the Generations
Jim Harding, Brett Dolter, and Katherine Arbuthnott
- - - -
Wherever it is promoted, the nuclear industry is a flash point for debate and SK is no exception. Recently the provincial government proposed an extensive set of recommendations to expand the nuclear industry and opened a public consultation process on the issue. Thirty years ago a very similar debate occurred in the province. In the context of four key themes of the debate, environmental health, weapons connection, energy policy, and economics, the speakers will describe research on the public response to nuclear expansion in the two time periods. A generation ago, the 1980s uranium inquiries showed a public paradigm shift from scienctism to sustainability, and the recent public consultations revealed the evolution of this shift in vision and values underlying the debate in Saskatchewan.
http://www.campioncollege.sk.ca/news-an ... &year=2010
=============================
2. Cameco Community Investment Report
http://www.cameco.com/responsibility/community/
Click on Link on the top right-hand corner
=========================
3. No Nukes News - Feb. 26, 2010
Slow economy leaves Ontario ample power
System regulator says unprecedented array of electricity options offers nuclear wiggle room
Stevens said new generation will likely be needed after 2018, but there's no reason it needs to be nuclear. "We could build a new nuclear plant, or we could build more wind and gas plants," he said.
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
770407--slow-economy-leaves-ontario-ample-power
----------------------------------------------------------------
10 ideas that could save the planet
#1. SHUT DOWN COAL-FIRED PLANTS
We’re already producing 23 per cent more electricity than peak demand forecast for this summer. And 27 per cent more power than peak demand forecast for the summer of 2014, according to a report released this week by the Ontario Clean Air Alliance. You’ve read this right. We have energy to burn, minus the coal currently choking our lungs. A coal shutdown can be accomplished without brownouts or spending millions on dangerous nukes, but we do have to commit to stop selling our surplus power to the U.S. when the economy picks up. Cancelling coal isn’t far-fetched. All it’ll take is a champion in the Liberal cabinet.
http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=173819
------------------------------------------------------------------
Excuse Me, But That Nuclear Plant Has Its Hand On Your Wallet
What's the worst thing that could happen? Plane crash, deliberate or accidental? Earthquake? Design flaw? Construction flaw? Operator error? What's the potential damage in dollars? How about $600 billion, according to the Sandia National Laboratory.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gsi ... y_id=57400
Note: In Canada we have the Nuclear Liability Act which insures the nuclear industry against accidents up to a max. of $75 million. What a deal! No other industry is able to operate without insurance. For more on this see: http://www.ccnr.org/insurance.html –a
----------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont Senate Votes to Close Nuclear Plant
In an unusual state foray into nuclear regulation, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 Wednesday to block operation of the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant after 2012, citing radioactive leaks, misstatements in testimony by plant officials and other problems. Unless the chamber reverses itself, it will be the first time in more than 20 years that the public or its representatives has decided to close a reactor.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/25 ... 012&st=cse
----------------------------------------------------------------
Look out for the nuclear bomb coming with your electric bill
Higher electric rates will appear, not when plants begin operating, but years, if not decades, before they come on line.
http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/
look-out-for-the-nuclear-bomb-coming-with-your-electric-bill/
----------------------------------------------------------------
Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama's Nuclear Power Proposal
"When Wall Street won't invest in something, that should tell you how bad it is." "[Nuclear energy] is the most socialized energy in the world and would not exist except for public money."
http://www.truthout.org/
major-fallout-predicted-over-obamas-nuclear-power-proposal57088
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear power is too risky
If our nation wants to reduce global warming, air pollution and energy instability, we should invest only in the best energy options. Nuclear energy isn't one of them.
Every dollar spent on nuclear is one less dollar spent on clean renewable energy and one more dollar spent on making the world a comparatively dirtier and a more dangerous place, because nuclear power and nuclear weapons go hand in hand.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/02/22/
jacobson.nuclear.power.con/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tritium Awareness Project
TAP aims to raise awareness about tritium, demystify the nature of this dangerous material for public and politicians alike, tighten standards and reduce emissions and exposures of Canadians to tritium. Tritium is a serious hazard in Canada, requiring urgent action by the public and legislators alike. On this website you will find scientific documents, media reports, personal stories and fact sheets.
http://www.tapcanada.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chernobyl Legacy
Photo Essay on Chernobyl by Paul Fusco
http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/chernobyl
----------------------------------------------------------------
Corporate Media Are Using Industry Talking Points to Lie to Us About Nuclear Power
The media should reject the use of industry rhetoric, stop using Nukespeak talking points, and start telling us the truth about nuclear power!
http://www.alternet.org/media/145792/
corporate_media_are_using_industry_talking_points_to_lie_
to_us_about_nuclear_power
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Files
The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation initiates and supports worldwide efforts to abolish nuclear weapons, to strengthen international law and institutions, and to inspire and empower a new generation of peace leaders.
http://www.nuclearfiles.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------
Top 6 nuclear energy myths exposed
http://www.mnn.com/technology/research- ... hs-exposed
------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeing the wind
Wind power has never been this big in Canada. And the Great Lakes are a superb site, getting the maximum wind exposure without building towers in people's backyards.
The launch of a wave of new wind farms in Ontario will create long-term opportunities for manufacturers to supply them -- and replace some of the jobs that the auto industry can no longer provide. There was a time when the Seaway carried iron ore and car parts. As demand for that traditional cargo falls, perhaps the same waters could supply jobs from energy.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology ... d/2600263/
story.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
Tritium In the River
to the tune of "Take me to the River"
---
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water.
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water, water.
I don't know why this nuke is online
All the trouble that it puts us through.
Takes our money, gives us cancer.
We haven't seen the worst of it yet.
I want it closed, can you hear me?
Shut it down today?
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water
Tritium in the River, toxins in the water, water...
------------------------------------------------------------------
THE POWER OF COMMUNITY: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil
Free film screening and discussion
A film on how Cuba responded to the challenges of peak oil in the 90's followed by a discussion on creating a more local, low-energy society and addressing the challenges of climate change in our own neighbourhood.
Tuesday, March 2nd at 6:30 pm
Annette Street Branch Library, 145 Annette St. (E of Pacific, W of Keele), Community Room 1, Toronto
Organized by Green 13, Hosted by Annette Branch Library
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, Cuba's economy went into a tailspin. With imports of oil cut by more than half and food by 80 percent people were desperate. This film tells of the hardships and struggles as well as the community and creativity of the Cuban people during this difficult time. Cubans share how they transitioned from a highly mechanized, industrial agricultural system to one using organic methods of farming and local, urban gardens. It is an unusual look into the Cuban culture during this economic crisis, which they call "The Special Period." The film opens with a short history of Peak Oil, a term for the time in our history when world oil production will reach its all-time peak and begin to decline forever. Cuba, the only country that has faced such a crisis the massive reduction of fossil fuels is an example of options and hope.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Global Governance and the Future of Nuclear Energy
Wed. Mar, 3, 2 p.m.
At the Monk Centre, University of Toronto
Speaker: Louise Frachette, Distinguished Fellow, Centre for International Governance Innovation
For more info and to register: http://webapp.mcis.utoronto.ca/EventDet ... entid=8744
------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff
Outreach Director
Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402
Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
========================
4. VERMONT SENATE VOTES TO CLOSE VERMONT YANKEE
LEGISLATURES IN WEST VIRGINIA AND ARIZONA DEFEAT PRO-NUCLEAR MEASURES - THE TIDE IS TURNING.....KEEP UP YOUR EFFORTS
February 26, 2010
Dear Friends,
First, thank you to everyone who participated in yesterday's National Call-Congress Day! We received a lot of reports back from people; if you haven't sent in a quick report, please do.
We'll be continuing to put pressure on Congress to prevent a tripling of the nuclear reactor loan program, and we hope you'll continue to help: when we all speak together, our impact is great.
A reminder: if you haven't yet written to your Senators this week, please do so here. And if you haven't yet written your House member this week, please do so here. And please make sure your family members and friends have the opportunity to send in their letters as well.
Now the good news! The nuclear industry may think it's on the verge of a revival, but the people of the United States are saying something very different!
In Vermont on Tuesday, the State Senate voted 26-4 to close the Vermont Yankee reactor when its license expires in 2012. That's a huge victory, but one that will need to be protected over the coming months since no one is foolish enough to believe the Entergy Corporation is just going to slink home. Here is a statement from Citizens Awareness Network on the vote.
Yesterday in West Virginia, a bill to repeal that state's ban on new nuclear construction was defeated in the state legislature. Although the bill had already passed the Senate's Energy and Mining Committee, it received only one vote in the Judiciary Committee and is now dead for the year.
And yesterday in Arizona, a bill to classify nuclear power as renewable energy was withdrawn following heavy lobbying from the solar power industry and environmental community.
Congratulations to everyone in those states who worked on those issues.
If Washington and the nuclear industry think they can shove nuclear power down the throats of Americans and make us pay for it at the same time, they'd better think again. The tide is turning: if we all keep it up and keep this movement growing, we really can build the nuclear-free, carbon-free energy future our planet requires.
We'll soon let you know the next steps you can take. In the meantime, thank you again for all your work and activism. It is essential.
Michael Mariotte
Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
Check out the networking site for grassroots anti-nuclear activists: http://grassrootsnucleus.ning.com/
==========================
5. Beyond Nuclear Bulletin - February 26, 2010
Top Stories
Vermont Vote Signals Nuclear Retreat and Sets Precedent for Other States' Action
Background: In a roll call the Vermont State Senate voted 26 to 4 to block federal relicensing of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant operated by its parent company Entergy Nuclear. The vote is an overwhelming statement of "no confidence" in both the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) 20-year relicensing process and the continued operation of nuclear power in Vermont beyond the reactor's current 40-year license which expires on March 12, 2012. Beyond Nuclear hailed the state vote to shutter the aging reactor as a victory for local democracy and a beacon for other states to assert more control over radioactive trespasses by the nuclear industry.
Our View: Vermont is now at the forefront of a fight to rein in an undemocratic technology and a promotionally biased licensing process. The vote is precedent setting. Vermont has said it is not in the best interest of a state to allow nuclear plants to operate without a waste disposal plan, with insufficient radioactive cleanup funds and shielded by shell corporations hiding behind limited liability firewalls. The vote offers an example for companion initiatives in other states.
The examples of the undemocratic impositions thrust upon states and community hosts by nuclear power technology are many. One particularly egregious affront is extending operating the nuclear reactor licenses and nuclear waste generation without any scientifically approved long-term environmental management plan and the repeated denial by the NRC to allow public hearings on the issue in its new licensing and relicensing process. Reactor sites like Vermont Yankee are de facto indefinite nuclear waste storage facilities at best and possibly permanent radioactive dumps that were never environmentally qualified as such for either an original 40-year license or 20-year license renewal proceedings. Vermonters voted "no confidence" in the Entergy Nuclear effort to spin off continued operational costs and ultimately its decommissioning commitment for atomic cleanup and site deconstruction to a shell corporation (Enexus) where industry is establishing Limited Liability Corporations as a common business practice with the consolidation of more reactors into fewer parent nuclear corporations. Similarly, the vote shows "no confidence" in the NRC and throws a legal blockade in front of a federal relicensing proceeding. The NRC sees no nexus between the uncontrolled and still undiscovered radioactive leaks at Vermont Yankee and the public's health and safety. The NRC relicensing process has failed to capture or address the aging buried pipes now leaking.
What You Can Do: Celebrate and hold up the banner of Vermont's democracy in action. Contact Beyond Nuclear on how you can educate your community and your state representatives and start work on similar initiatives. Additional examples of the nuclear industry retreat from its much touted "renaissance" can be viewed on the Beyond Nuclear website at http://www.beyondnuclear.org/the-nuclear-retreat/
Kazakhstan and Niger: nuclear power is the antithesis of energy independence
Background: On the heels of President Obama's announcement to increase the United States' reliance nuclear energy as part of his plan for a energy independence, the Washington Post published its story on the growing political instability mushrooming in Kazakhstan, one of the world's largest known uranium reserves, where the United States, China, Russia, Japan and Canada are among those jockeying for control of this valued and dangerous uranium ore.
Meanwhile, the February 18, 2010 military coup in the sub-Saharan nation of Niger raises as many questions as answers about the African country's future. While uranium mining makes up the bulk of Niger's foreign income, 80% of its population lives on subsistence farming with 60% below the poverty level amidst recurring famines. Coup leaders have made a pledge to bring democracy to the resource rich but impoverished country. However, international intrigue and conflicts continues to brew here as the French monopoly of uranium mining is being challenged by China.
Our View: Nuclear power is the antithesis of "energy independence" as claimed by the industry. The emerging conflicts in Kazakhstan and Niger illuminate how continued and expanded reliance on uranium power comes at the expense of future resource conflicts, human domination and environmental predation and injustice. In fact, the keys to real energy independence are found in substantially expanding energy efficiency, conservation and expanded renewable energy programs.
Register now for Alliance for Nuclear Accountability's annual "DC Days"!
Background: Beyond Nuclear is a proud member of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA), a coalition of dozens of groups across the country with over 20 years of experience. A highlight of ANA's year is its annual "DC Days," four days of advocacy and training about nuclear weapons and power issues! At DC Days, you will learn from experts and maximize your impact, meet with Members of Congress or their staff and Administration officials, and network with activists from across the country. And, just as in previous years, DC Days participants will work to: oppose nuclear power and address radioactive waste concerns; increase funding and improve environmental cleanup standards at Dept. of Energy (DOE) weapons complex sites; oppose new nuclear bomb production plants; prevent the dirty, dangerous and expensive reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel; promote safer solutions for plutonium disposal; stop research and development of new nuclear weapons; create a fair and comprehensive waste cleanup plan at contaminated DOE sites; support Nuclear Non-proliferation (especially important this year, with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference coming up in May); and support long-term environmental protection at DOE sites. See ANA's website for more information about DC Days.
Our View: While many of ANA's member groups live in the shadows of DOE weapons complex sites, and devote themselves to watch-dogging them, Beyond Nuclear is honored to bring nuclear power watch-dogging expertise to the coalition. For this reason, we encourage all Beyond Nuclear supporters to consider attending this year's ANA DC Days, to add yet more anti-nuclear power activism to one of the best "lobby days" to take place in Washington D.C. each year. One of the best parts of all are the parties, an informal one for networking with fellow activists, and a formal one for awarding Members of Congress, journalists, Administration officials, and the activist of the year for exemplary efforts to address nuclear issues.
What You Can Do: Register now with ANA to attend DC Days. ANA's DC Days intern, Dan Yoken, stands ready to help you find low cost flights and affordable lodging. Some home stays are also available. Dan's email is dyoken@ananuclear.org, while his phone number is (202) 544-0217 ext. 2501. Kevin Kamps at Beyond Nuclear can also help answer your questions about ANA DC Days.
Added Bonus: In addition, DC Days will be preceded by an important grassroots meeting about high-level radioactive waste policy in the U.S. in light of the demise of the Yucca Mountain dumpsite proposal and formation of Energy Secretary Chu's blue ribbon commission seeking a "Plan B" radioactive waste policy. The all-day meeting will be held on Saturday, March 13th, and will begin at 10 a.m. with coffee at the office of Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Suite 340, 6930 Carroll Ave., in Takoma Park, Maryland 20912. Mary Olson of NIRS has written about the agenda for this meeting, as well as other ways folks can take part in high-level radioactive waste activism. Phone Kevin Kamps, (240) 462-3216, to learn more about the radioactive waste meeting. We hope you can join us for both the radioactive waste meeting, as well as ANA DC Days!
Beyond Nuclear In the News
Beyond Nuclear is quoted in the Toledo Blade on Obama's nuclear power position.
Paul Gunter was featured in Rutland Herald coverage of a pivotal Feb. 21st anti-Vermont Yankee rally held in Brattleboro.
Paul Gunter was also featured in Brattleboro Reformer coverage of the same rally.
Kevin Kamps was quoted in the London, England Morning Star objecting to President Obama's awarding of $8.3 billion in taxpayer-backed nuclear loan guarantees to Southern Nuclear for constructing two new reactors of the flawed Toshiba-Westinghouse AP1000 design.
Sign our letter to President Obama
Please consider signing our letter to president Obama on our website urging him to oppose nuclear power in climate legislation. Despite his statements supporting new reactor construction, the president must hear a clear and unequivocal message of opposition from the electorate that brought him to power. Please sign today. We will deliver the letter as soon as the climate bill is on the legislative agenda.
=======================
6. Nuclear Subsidies Put Taxpayers at Risk
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/25-4
Published on Thursday, February 25, 2010 by The Boston Globe
by Michael Kranish
WASHINGTON - President Obama's plan to kick-start the construction of nuclear power plants in the United States comes with a big catch: Because private banks won't lend to an industry viewed as financially risky, taxpayers would be accountable for billions in government-guaranteed loans if plant developers default.
Precisely how much risk the public would carry remains a subject of lobbying by the industry, which is trying to minimize its financial exposure as the political climate in Washington has warmed in its favor.
Obama said last week that his administration had conditionally awarded a loan guarantee for the construction of two nuclear reactors at a plant in Georgia and said he wants to fund many more such projects under a program that could exceed $50 billion. But critics said the president has failed to address the potential liability to taxpayers for such loans.
"There is a huge potential risk for taxpayers,'' said Autumn Hanna, who analyzes federal loan guarantees at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonparti san group. She said the risk could be in the tens of billions of dollars and said the public shouldn't be asked to assume responsibility banks are unwilling to take.
To reduce taxpayer risk, the Obama administration wants nuclear companies to pay fees into a government-managed insurance fund to back the loans. But the administration has not said how large the premiums should be, and power companies are lobbying for the lowest possible rate to keep the program economically feasible. Suggestions have ranged from fees of 1 percent to 25 percent of the loan.
The nuclear industry, while acknowledging that taxpayer dollars will be at risk, said the downsides will be minimized by a combination of factors, including new, safer reactor designs that will enable companies to deliver projects on time and on budget.
"Of course there's risk; there's risk in any project,'' said Leslie Kass, senior director of business policy and programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's lobbying group. "But it is a calculated risk, and we think it is a low risk.''
MORE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/25-4
========================
7. No deal‚ on burying nuclear waste
http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/barrow/no ... Path=news/
Last updated at 13:12, Friday, 26 February 2010
BURYING highly radioactive waste underground in Copeland to solve one of the nation‚s biggest problems is not a done deal.
Copeland Borough Council leader, councillor Elaine Woodburn, told a meeting there had been no discussion with the government for the borough to accept a repository.
It was stressed at Tuesday’s (23) West Cumbria Managing Radioactive Waste Safely Partnership meeting that Copeland, Allerdale and Cumbria County Council had only expressed an interest into the possibility of “hosting” a deep underground repository.
The partnership is giving information and advice to the three councils on whether West Cumbria should proceed to the next stage with government.
This is when the Nuclear Decommissioning will look at social, economic and environmental criteria needed to identify potentially suitable disposal sites.
Cllr Woodburn said: “The geological facility would have an important effect on people living in the county particularly West Cumbria for many generations to come. We want everyone to have the chance to help us decide whether we should continue talking to the government about the possibility of locating the facility in this area.”
County council cabinet member, councillor Tim Knowles, said: “We want to be completely satisfied that locating the facility will be in the best interests of the area and is supported by local people before final decisions are made. We are a long way from being able to do that yet.”
MORE:
http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/barrow/no ... Path=news/
====================
8. Environmental Defence Canada GreenNews – Feb. 25, 2010
https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:CampaignPublic/
id:36689.8034524465/rid:a6be5293c1dc58881ab7c02f0dbd5f98#Story1
Slow Death by Rubber Duck: How the Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Life Affects Our Health
Rick Smith and Bruce Lourie, with Sarah Dopp (Knopf Canada)
This eco-bible also happens to have one of the most memorable titles of the year. Slow Death by Rubber Duck is the result of a two-year experiment by a pair of environmental researchers who took the Super Size Me approach to investigating environmental pollutants, measuring the level of toxins in their own bodies from exposure to everyday products. The result is a chilling reminder of the toxicity of modern life, as well as a call to action. "The stunt science … may be the book’s key feature, but what really stands out is the solid writing," wrote Q&Q reviewer Louise Fabiani. "Considering how undeniably depressing their findings are, the authors manage to stay this side of apocalyptic without sounding flippant. Not only is the book scary, it’s hard to put down."
Get your very own Slow Death By Rubber Duck!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Groups Speak Up About Lawsuits Designed to Muzzle
More than 60 Ontario groups released a letter (.pdf) to Premier McGuinty asking him to move ahead with a new law to protect citizens from lawsuits designed to stifle legitimate public participation. Such suits are often called strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs.
Many of the 60 signatories to the letter, including Environmental Defence, have experience with a SLAPP, which can put victims in the position of either backing down or losing everything. The Province of Quebec and half of the U.S. states already have laws in place to protect people from SLAPPs.
You can take action by signing our petition to stop SLAPPs.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Quebecers Concerned About Global Warming, Despite Oil Sands Money
A poll we conducted last week found the majority of Quebec residents surveyed are less likely to vote for the current government because of the Prime Minister's policies on global warming. It also shows that the appointment of a Quebec MP to oversee the Natural Resources ministry, which is the federal government's main presence on oil and gas issues in Canada, won’t change the majority of people’s negative views of the oil sands. They also disagreed that they should accept increased global warming pollution due to money received from the oil sands in Alberta.
You can read the complete poll on our website (.pdf)
========================
9. Council of Canadians E-News – February 2010
http://www.canadians.org/publications/subscribe/enews/
2010/February.html
Go here to see our action alert.
Harper’s ‘Buy American’ plan bad deal for Canadians
Last week the Council of Canadians, along with the Canadian Union of Public Employees, leaked a copy of the Canada-U.S. Agreement on government procurement (the "Buy American" deal) to the media. It was the first time the wide-sweeping deal, which will permanently constrain provincial spending options in many areas, had been put forward for public scrutiny. This deal binds the provinces to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules on public spending – something they had been unwilling to do until now, for very good reasons.
Despite a flurry of protests from the public, civil society groups and labour organizations, and criticisms of the deal in the national media, International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan announced last week that the provinces had approved the text of the agreement, which has been sent to Geneva for inclusion in Canada's WTO commitments. It was signed without public consultation, and with parliament prorogued, no opportunity for questions or debate in the House of Commons. Groups opposing it say it gives little to no benefit to Canadians and forbids the provinces from including "buy local" or "buy Canadian" provisions on government contracts in many areas, notably in the construction of new public infrastructure, where previously local incentives would have been allowed. Such conditions on public spending are under-used in Canada but have proven effective where they exist in creating local jobs and boosting local or provincial economies.
As Council of Canadians Trade Campaigner Stuart Trew argues in a recent trade blog, the deal will not guarantee Canadian companies substantial new access to U.S. government contracts, and it will permanently restrict the flexibility of the provinces and territories to use procurement as a public policy tool by making the financial bottom-line the only consideration when spending public money, and then enforcing it legally through the WTO. “This is a case where the devil is not in the details — it’s in the principle that free trade dogma should dictate all government policy at all levels, even down to how your local town council spends money,” explains Trew.
We are encouraging people to continue contacting their MPPs and MLAs to voice opposition to this deal. Go here to see our action alert.
To read more about the Buy American deal go here.
To watch a video of Trade Campaigner Stuart Trew argue the merits of the deal on the Business News Network show Squeezeplay go here.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Watch the preview for the new documentary Water on the Table
A new social issue documentary by filmmaker Liz Marshall is set to be released this spring. The film chronicles some of the work of Council of Canadians National Chairperson Maude Barlow and her efforts as an “international water-warrior.” It asks the question: Is water a commercial good like running shoes or Coca-Cola? Or, is water a human right like air? Using strong visuals and a personal narrative, the documentary highlights Maude’s work to have water recognized as a human right at the United Nations, to stop the Site 41 landfill in Simcoe County, and to raise awareness about the devastating environmental impacts of the tar sands in northern Alberta.
The film will be broadcast by TV Ontario on March 24, and may be more widely available later this spring.
Go here to watch a preview of Water on the Table.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Why the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan must divest from privatized water in Chile
The Council of Canadians is calling on Ontario teachers to rethink their investment plans in Chile’s privatized water industry.
Last month, National Chairperson Maude Barlow sent a letter to the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan – jointly run by the Ontario Teachers’ Federation and the Ontario government – calling on shareholders to demand a higher ethical standard for their pension investments and to stop investing in private, for-profit water services in Chile.
In 1998 the Chilean government decided to privatize water services. Within a decade, Chile went from almost entirely publicly-run water services to 97 per cent private services. Water rates rose substantially and many families had their water services cut-off when they couldn’t afford to pay the inflated bills. Workers lost jobs and water quality standards diminished.
“Ontario teachers support the fight for public water services in the province and teach their students about the urgent need to support the right to water around the world. So how is it possible that Ontario teachers are represented by a pension fund that betrays these efforts, and supports a private water services industry in Chile that is undermining the right to safe, clean public water in that country?” asked Barlow.
To read the Council’s media release on this issue go here.
To read more about this issue go here. If you are a teacher, or a former teacher, please click here to sign the petitition calling on the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan to divest from private water in Chile.
=======================
10. Bloom Box Helps Companies Reduce Electricity Costs
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20100222/tc_nf/71799
Barry Levine, newsfactor.com Barry Levine, newsfactor.com – Mon Feb 22, 2:33 pm ET
- - - -
WATCH: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khK_QTWl ... re=related
- - - -
Your business probably already uses Wi-Fi for wirelessly connecting laptops in your office, and employees' cell phones are replacing landlines. Now a new energy-in-a-box technology could let your business disconnect from the electrical grid as well.
While many new technologies for untangling businesses and consumers from power lines are emerging, one called the Bloom Box has been receiving a lot of attention recently -- including a feature piece on Sunday's 60 Minutes. The fuel-cell technology, from Bloom Energy in Silicon Valley, Calif., adapts NASA technology to create a clean-energy powerplant in a box that is now being used by several large corporations, including Google, Federal Express, Wal-Mart and eBay.
MORE: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20100222/tc_nf/71799
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: March 01, 2010
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:33 am
NUKE NEWS: March 01, 2010
(Dydd Gwyl Dewi Dedwydd! Happy St David's Day)
Compilation
1. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
2. AFTER A DECADE OF SHOCK AND AWE by Jim Harding
3. NATO countries call for disarmament
4. New Think and Old Weapons
5. 'Very good year' for Cameco purchases
6. Tom Adams: Time to rethink AECL’s meltdown
7. Water Issues Derailing Nuclear Power in Utah
8. Giving Money to the Nuclear Industry Is Lunacy
9. Corporate Media Are Using Industry Talking Points to Lie to Us About Nuclear Power
10. Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama's Nuclear Power Proposal
11. Vermont Senate Votes to Close Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant
12. Land owners out of mind, out of site
13. Studsvik to recycle Finnish heat exchangers
14. "Downstream" Film Showings in Alberta
=========================
1. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
With only 10 days to go until Canada’s first Bottled Water Free Day on March 11th, there is momentum across the country. Every day more and more individuals, schools, municipalities, environmental organizations and unions are signing the pledge!
· NEW Bottled Water Free Day Video – Watch it Here!
-Actor and Comedian Derek Forgie just created the following video for Bottled Water Free Day. Watch it NOW!
· Let us know what you are doing for Bottled Water Free Day!
-Register your event here!
-Find out what events are already happening across the country: Click here
-Click here to check out a list of ideas for events you can do in your community!
Find Out More!
Visit www.bottledwaterfreeday.ca and http://www.journeesansbouteilles.ca
Questions? Email: info@bottledwaterfreeday.ca
Join the Bottled Water Free Day Facebook Group
Follow actions on Twitter!
Thanks,
The Polaris Institute InsideTheBottle.org campaign team
Tony, Joe, Richard, Elly, Tanya, Daniel, Cam, Kaitlynn, Nipuni and Fiona
=======================
2. AFTER A DECADE OF SHOCK AND AWE by Jim Harding
Published in UNOS - Feb. 26.10
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1578#1578
It’s common to recap events in decades. We often even adopt decade identities – the rebellious sixties, the greedy eighties, etc. Might we call the first decade of the 21st century the “shock and awe” decade?
The decade is mostly defined by the aftermath of the Sept. 11th 2001 bombing of New York’s Twin Towers. The hysteria generated after this was instrumental in starting two destructive “wars on terrorism”, which trudge on. The Security State has grown along with insurgencies and the politics of fear, none of which are good foundations for building sustainable societies. But much more happened! The decade saw a global economic crisis, devastating natural disasters, extreme storms and deepening of the climate crisis controversy, all of which will shape the coming decade.
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1578#1578
- - - -
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies who lives in the Qu’Appelle Valley. Past columns are available at http://jimharding.brinkster.net
============================
3. NATO countries call for disarmament
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 7:21 PM
Background:
This is a great opportunity for Canadians and other world citizens to write to the Canadian government urging it to fully support this initiative on the part of five NATO countries.
It is time for NATO to renounce the use of nuclear weapons and to change its policy -- which describes such weapons as "essential" and implies that NATO would not shrink from being the first to use nuclear weapons if a conflict using "conventional" weapons was being lost by NATO forces.
Gordon Edwards
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
NATO countries call for disarmament
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/
NATO+countries+call+disarmament/2620593/story.html
Ottawa Citizen, FEBRUARY 27, 2010
Five NATO countries on Friday called for the Atlantic alliance to debate nuclear disarmament at its meeting in April. In a letter to the NATO Secretary, foreign ministers of Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway and the Netherlands said arms control and disarmament were higher on the political agenda than they had been for many years, due to initiatives by U.S. President Barack Obama. The letter stated: "We believe that in
NATO we should discuss what we can do to move closer to this overall political objective."
MORE:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/
NATO+countries+call+disarmament/2620593/story.html
===============================
4. New Think and Old Weapons
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/opinion/28sun1.html
Editorial Published: February 27, 2010
Every four years the White House issues a “nuclear posture review.” That may sound like an anachronism. It isn’t. In a world where the United States and Russia still have more than 20,000 nuclear weapons — and Iran, North Korea and others have seemingly unquenchable nuclear appetites — what the United States says about its arsenal matters enormously.
President Obama’s review was due to Congress in December. That has been delayed, in part because of administration infighting. The president needs to get this right. It is his chance to finally jettison cold war doctrine and bolster America’s credibility as it presses to rein in Iran, North Korea and other proliferators.
Mr. Obama has already committed rhetorically to the vision of a world without nuclear weapons. But we are concerned that some of his advisers, especially at the Pentagon, are resisting his bold ambitions. He needs to stick with the ideas he articulated in his campaign and in speeches last year in Prague and at the United Nations.
MORE: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/opinion/28sun1.html
=============================
5. 'Very good year' for Cameco purchases.
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/
Very+good+year+Cameco/2616242/story.html
Company reports $1.1B in net earnings
By Cassandra Kyle, The StarPhoenixFebruary 26, 2010
Despite net earnings of $1.1 billion in 2009 and $1.3 billion in available cash, uranium giant Cameco Corp. continued to say Thursday it is in no rush to make any
The Saskatoon-based company, which reported its record annual earnings late Wednesday, said it will continue to focus on its plan to double annual production to 40 million pounds of U3O8 by 2018.
Cameco president and CEO Jerry Grandey said Thursday any business opportunities that come the company's way will be closely scrutinized.
"Let us be clear: The money is not burning a hole in our pockets," Grandey said in a conference call with analysts, investors and media.
"The financial position gives us great flexibility. We intend to take our time to ensure that any new investment will bring real value to our shareholders."
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/
Very+good+year+Cameco/2616242/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~
Nuclear power enjoying renaissance: Cameco CEO
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/02/25/
sk-cameco-nuclear-energy-uranium-jerry-grandey.html
Last Updated: Thursday, February 25, 2010 | 9:53 PM CT CBC News
Jerry Grandey, the president and CEO of uranium mining company Cameco, says the nuclear energy industry is entering a renaissance and he is looking forward to reaping the rewards for increased demand for reactor fuel.
"Our goal is to double our annual uranium production to help fuel the nuclear renaissance," Grandey said Thursday in a conference call with investment analysts and media.
During the call, Grandey spoke about rising demand for uranium to supply nuclear energy plants.
"Skeptics who dismiss the idea of a nuclear renaissance ignore the accelerating momentum," he said, referring to increased demand.
~ ~ ~ ~
Cameco Skywalk officially opens at RUH
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Cameco+Skywalk+officially+opens/2605046/story.html
The Star Phoenix February 24, 2010
Dignitaries on Tuesday unveiled the new look of one of the most travelled pedestrian corridors in Saskatoon.
The Cameco Skywalk at Royal University Hospital officially opened with an artistic flair courtesy of local artists.
"It's an impressive way to enter the hospital," said Cameco Corp. CEO Jerry Grandey.
The skywalk, the corridor connecting RUH and its parking lot, now features photographic murals of well-known Saskatoon cityscapes along the river and interior skyline paintings by young artists from Saskatoon Community Youth Arts Programming (SCYAP).
"For many people who enter this building, this will be the first thing they see and we hope it creates a sense of hope and healing," said Saskatoon Health Region president and CEO Maura Davies.
The RUH Foundation named the skywalk to recognize Cameco's $1.5- million contribution to the foundation's campaign that established the Cameco chair in aboriginal health at the University of Saskatchewan.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Cameco+Skywalk+officially+opens/2605046/story.html
==========================
6. Tom Adams: Time to rethink AECL’s meltdown
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blog ... t/archive/
2010/02/25/tom-adams-time-to-rethink-aecl-s-meltdown.aspx
AECL, despite reviews and promises, has lost money every year since 1952
By Tom Adams, February 25, 2010, National Post
The next federal budget marks a historic opportunity to constrain the expanding liabilities of the Crown nuclear promotion agency, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), by finally killing off the Candu reactor expansion program.
Policy choices today are less about AECL’s contribution to the deficit next year and more about AECL’s deficit contribution five years or 50 years from now.
AECL’s bureaucratic survival since the 1950s has relied on hyping its status as a high-tech employment agency, promising future profits and morphing its mandate to take on new government objectives. AECL once hitched its wagon to regional development
where it now hangs on to climate change. Unlike real businesses, AECL’s ace in the hole has been its ability to develop an ever-expanding portfolio of liabilities and therefore a sustainable claim on federal taxpayers.
Notwithstanding a continuous process of management shake-ups, policy reviews, restructuring initiatives and turn-around plans, the federal “investment” in AECL has been cash-negative every year since AECL was formed in 1952.
The federal government has so far sunk over $21-billion into AECL in 2009 dollars, of which $1.3-billion was sunk in the last four years.
MORE:
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blog ... t/archive/
2010/02/25/tom-adams-time-to-rethink-aecl-s-meltdown.aspx
=============================
7. Water Issues Derailing Nuclear Power in Utah
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/26/
water-issues-derailing-nuclear-power-in-utah/
Posted by Tara Lohan at 9:30 am February 26, 2010
Nuclear power has been a hot topic these past few weeks with Vermont’s leaking reactor, Georgia’s plans for new ones (thanks to Obama), and the press’s blind approval of all things nuclear.
And now, Rachel Waldholz from High Country News, writes that Blue Castle Holdings, “a 3-year-old, politically connected startup” is trying to get Utah’s first new nuclear plant since 1987 built in the state.
While there are lots of reasons that nuclear power is a bad idea, residents in Utah are particularly concerned about water. Waldholz writes:
The first hurdle is more immediate. In the Utah desert, this possible climate change solution is colliding with one of its projected consequences: water scarcity.
Blue Castle needs some 50,000 acre-feet annually — enough water to supply up to 100,000 homes — to cool the reactors of its proposed 3,000 megawatt plant, which would produce enough electricity to power nearly 3 million households.
Apparently they hope to lease 53,600 acre-feet from upstream San Juan and Kane counties, but the plan is not without criticism, especially because in drought years water may go to more senior water holders and the project could be shorted.
MORE:
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/26/
water-issues-derailing-nuclear-power-in-utah/
============================
8. Giving Money to the Nuclear Industry Is Lunacy
http://blogs.alternet.org/justasoapboxo ... ar-lunacy/
Posted by beeden at 8:41 am February 18, 2010
Nuclear solutions to energy problems will never be the answer, for like the current oil turmoil, they are a finite, non-renewable resource. To spend billions and more billions on such an energy system is to remain blinkered to the excesses of the stockmarket and the propensity of a few to gamble with the planet’s future for some cold cash.
The history of the nuclear industry’s failure to provide safe and secure storage of its toxic waste has been an issue since its inception over fifty years ago. The poisoning of our most vital resource, water, for thousands of years, from its initial mining operations to the final cooling processes verges on insanity. I cannot for the life of me comprehend in any way, shape or form why this industry is being given further resources in a time of economic crisis.
There’s the proven non-environmentally destructive capacities of renewable energies, as in Spain recently; “For a brief period over the weekend, wind power supplied a record 40.8 percent of electricity consumed in the country, the national industry association reported on Tuesday.” These are yet to be globally embraced. And further along in the article, “Spain, which along with Germany and Denmark, is among the three biggest producers of wind power in the European Union, is aiming to triple the amount of energy it derives from renewable sources by 2020.” This would cover nearly all of the required energy demands of Spain, yet recalcitrant states around the globe cling to “old world” resource-based energy production that further exacerbates global warming.
MORE: http://blogs.alternet.org/justasoapboxo ... 010/02/18/
nuclear-lunacy/
=======================
9. Corporate Media Are Using Industry Talking Points to Lie to Us About Nuclear Power
http://www.alternet.org/story/145792/
By Rory O'Connor, MediaChannel.org
Posted on February 23, 2010, Printed on February 27, 2010
Nearly twenty years ago I co-wrote Nukespeak, a cultural history of the selling of nuclear technology for both peaceful and military purposes.
My co-authors and I dedicated the book to George Orwell, whose literary creation of 'newspeak' in the classic novel 1984 illustrated the power to control reality through the adroit manipulation of language. The euphemisms, obfuscations and omissions employed by nuclear boosters throughout both industry and government -- what one writer has called the "linguistic cosmetics" used "to avoid communicating uncomfortable or threatening thoughts so that the nuclear industry can control the images and perceptions of nuclear power" -- were so clearly reminiscent of Orwellian thought control that the homage seemed, if anything, perhaps a little too obvious.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145792/
===========================
10. Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama's Nuclear Power Proposal
http://www.truthout.org/
major-fallout-predicted-over-obamas-nuclear-power-proposal57088
Monday 22 February 2010
by: Grace Huang, t r u t h o u t | Report
While President Obama has announced an offer of $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for two new nuclear reactors, worries about potential cost overruns, health risks and safety concerns lead many to believe his proposal may cause far more harm than good - assuming that the reactors can be successfully built.
Should the builder borrow money and then default on the loan, the Obama administration's guarantee means that the lenders and investors would not suffer the financial loss. Instead, taxpayer money would be used to cover the cost.
Administration officials have said that the companies involved would pay fees to cover the possibility of default and that these loan guarantees would not cost taxpayers money. However, both the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office have estimated that the risk of default on a guarantee for new nuclear reactor construction could be as high as 50 percent.
Construction of nuclear reactors also consistently run into large cost and deadline overruns. The company that built the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia, where the two new reactors would be, initially estimated construction costs of $1 billion for four reactors. By 1989, that number had risen to $9 billion for only two reactors. Now, the estimate for the two new reactors is approximately $14 billion.
It is also difficult to finish building nuclear reactors on time. According to The New York Times, an analysis prepared for the German government in 2009 showed that of the 45 nuclear reactors under construction, 22 have run into delays. Some reactors overshot their budgets and deadlines or had faulty construction to the point that the projects were completely abandoned, losing billions of dollars in the process.
MORE:
http://www.truthout.org/
major-fallout-predicted-over-obamas-nuclear-power-proposal57088
==============================
11. Vermont Senate Votes to Close Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/25nuke.html
NY Times, Matthew Wald, February 24, 2010
MONTPELIER, Vt. - In an unusual state foray into nuclear regulation, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 Wednesday to block a license extension for the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, citing radioactive leaks, misstatements in testimony by plant officials and other problems.
Unless the chamber reverses itself, it would be the first time in more than 20 years that the public or its representatives decided to close a reactor.
The vote came barely over a week after President Obama declared a new era of rebirth for the nation's nuclear industry, announcing federal loan guarantees of $8.3 billion to assure the construction of a twin-reactor plant near Augusta, Ga.
MORE: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/25nuke.html
=========================
12. Land owners out of mind, out of site
http://www.smh.com.au/national/
land-owners-out-of-mind-out-of-site-20100226-p95w.html
LINDSAY MURDOCH AND TOM ARUP Sydney Morning Herald, Australia – February 27, 2010
* Nuclear waste dump plans are dividing an Aboriginal clan, write Lindsay Murdoch and Tom Arup. *
DIANNE STOKES says the Rudd government's decision to push ahead with plans to dump nuclear waste on land north of Tennant Creek has caused trouble in her Warlmanpa tribe.
"People have given away land that doesn't belong to them . now there is big trouble among us," she says.
For centuries, Aboriginal clans followed their dreaming across the gently sloping, low scrub land that became known last century by white people as Muckaty cattle station.
Now some members of one of those clans have agreed to allow Australia's first national waste dump to be established on 1.5 square kilometres of land they claim is theirs in return for $12 million, most of it in cash.
The terms of the agreement remain secret - even some members of the Ngapa clan who might get the money have not been given a copy.
The Federal Resources Minister, Martin Ferguson, revealed this week the government planned to pursue Muckaty as its nuclear dump site, saying it is the only place that had been "volunteered".
He introduced legislation in Parliament that gives his government the power to override a threat by the Northern Territory to block the dump being built at Muckaty, an earthquake-prone area 120 kilometres north of Tennant Creek.
If the dump - or radioactive waste repository as bureaucrats call it – is built, about 4000 cubic metres of waste that has been accumulating in small stores in southern states over the past 50 years would be transported there, by rail or road.
Trucks would move 2000 cubic metres of radioactive contaminated soil from the Woomera defence area in South Australia.
MORE:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/
land-owners-out-of-mind-out-of-site-20100226-p95w.html
=======================
13. Studsvik to recycle Finnish heat exchangers
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 02105.html
World Nuclear News, 19 February 2010
================================
Correction - An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Studsvik was to process used steam generators from the Olkiluoto plant. As a few readers have pointed out, Olkiluoto units 1 and 2 are boiling water reactors (BWRs) which, unlike pressurized water reactors (PWRs), do not have steam generators. Apologies for any confusion caused. - WNN
================================
Studsvik of Sweden has signed a contract with Finland's Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO) for the dismantling and metal recycling of old heat exchangers from the Olkiluoto nuclear power plant.
Studsvik's facility near Nyköping, Sweden, melts metal scrap, such as stainless steel, carbon steel, copper, aluminium or lead. Melting reduces the volume and weight of the waste, resulting in reduced costs for interim on-site storage and final disposal. The end-product is metal ingots, which can either be immediately free-released as conventional scrap metal or released after a period of decay storage. Residual products (slag, sorted material, cutting and blasting residues and dust from the ventilation filters) and ingots that cannot be free-released are returned to the customer.
Units 1 and 2 at TVO's Olkiluoto plant underwent an extensive modernization programme between 1995 and 1998. In both units, the steam separator, generator and main transformer were replaced; the internal components of the low-pressure turbines and the turbine control and protection system were replaced; and the high-pressure
turbine was modified.
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 02105.html
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
=========================
14. "Downstream" Film Showings in Alberta
http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2009/03/
downstream-film-showings-in-alberta.html
The screenings of DOWNSTREAM a documentary on the health concerns downstream from the oil sands are happening in Ft. Chipewyan Friday March 6, two screenings in Edmonton Sunday March 8 and Monday March 9th in Calgary.
TICKET INFO:
http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2009/03/
downstream-film-showings-in-alberta.html
Here is some of the promotional material for the film:
"DOWNSTREAM Canada, U.S.A., 2008, 33 minutes http://www.downstreamdoc.com/
At the heart of the multi-billion dollar tar sands industry in Northern Alberta, Dr. John O' Connor's career is jeopardized as he fights for the lives of the Aboriginal people living and dying of rare forms of cancer downstream from one of the largest oil operations in the world. Making the short-list for this year's Academy Award® Nominations for best short documentary, Downstream, provides an in-depth look at the impact oil sands extraction is taking on the surrounding communities."
"Witnessing unprecedented changes to their land, health and heritage, the people of Fort Chipewyan have struggled for years to have their concerns addressed by government and industry. Downstream has raised unparalleled awareness in Canada and the United States regarding the environmental, economic and social impacts of the tar sands on both sides of the border."
MORE:
http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2009/03/
downstream-film-showings-in-alberta.html
(Dydd Gwyl Dewi Dedwydd! Happy St David's Day)
Compilation
1. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
2. AFTER A DECADE OF SHOCK AND AWE by Jim Harding
3. NATO countries call for disarmament
4. New Think and Old Weapons
5. 'Very good year' for Cameco purchases
6. Tom Adams: Time to rethink AECL’s meltdown
7. Water Issues Derailing Nuclear Power in Utah
8. Giving Money to the Nuclear Industry Is Lunacy
9. Corporate Media Are Using Industry Talking Points to Lie to Us About Nuclear Power
10. Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama's Nuclear Power Proposal
11. Vermont Senate Votes to Close Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant
12. Land owners out of mind, out of site
13. Studsvik to recycle Finnish heat exchangers
14. "Downstream" Film Showings in Alberta
=========================
1. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
With only 10 days to go until Canada’s first Bottled Water Free Day on March 11th, there is momentum across the country. Every day more and more individuals, schools, municipalities, environmental organizations and unions are signing the pledge!
· NEW Bottled Water Free Day Video – Watch it Here!
-Actor and Comedian Derek Forgie just created the following video for Bottled Water Free Day. Watch it NOW!
· Let us know what you are doing for Bottled Water Free Day!
-Register your event here!
-Find out what events are already happening across the country: Click here
-Click here to check out a list of ideas for events you can do in your community!
Find Out More!
Visit www.bottledwaterfreeday.ca and http://www.journeesansbouteilles.ca
Questions? Email: info@bottledwaterfreeday.ca
Join the Bottled Water Free Day Facebook Group
Follow actions on Twitter!
Thanks,
The Polaris Institute InsideTheBottle.org campaign team
Tony, Joe, Richard, Elly, Tanya, Daniel, Cam, Kaitlynn, Nipuni and Fiona
=======================
2. AFTER A DECADE OF SHOCK AND AWE by Jim Harding
Published in UNOS - Feb. 26.10
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1578#1578
It’s common to recap events in decades. We often even adopt decade identities – the rebellious sixties, the greedy eighties, etc. Might we call the first decade of the 21st century the “shock and awe” decade?
The decade is mostly defined by the aftermath of the Sept. 11th 2001 bombing of New York’s Twin Towers. The hysteria generated after this was instrumental in starting two destructive “wars on terrorism”, which trudge on. The Security State has grown along with insurgencies and the politics of fear, none of which are good foundations for building sustainable societies. But much more happened! The decade saw a global economic crisis, devastating natural disasters, extreme storms and deepening of the climate crisis controversy, all of which will shape the coming decade.
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1578#1578
- - - -
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies who lives in the Qu’Appelle Valley. Past columns are available at http://jimharding.brinkster.net
============================
3. NATO countries call for disarmament
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 7:21 PM
Background:
This is a great opportunity for Canadians and other world citizens to write to the Canadian government urging it to fully support this initiative on the part of five NATO countries.
It is time for NATO to renounce the use of nuclear weapons and to change its policy -- which describes such weapons as "essential" and implies that NATO would not shrink from being the first to use nuclear weapons if a conflict using "conventional" weapons was being lost by NATO forces.
Gordon Edwards
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
NATO countries call for disarmament
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/
NATO+countries+call+disarmament/2620593/story.html
Ottawa Citizen, FEBRUARY 27, 2010
Five NATO countries on Friday called for the Atlantic alliance to debate nuclear disarmament at its meeting in April. In a letter to the NATO Secretary, foreign ministers of Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway and the Netherlands said arms control and disarmament were higher on the political agenda than they had been for many years, due to initiatives by U.S. President Barack Obama. The letter stated: "We believe that in
NATO we should discuss what we can do to move closer to this overall political objective."
MORE:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/
NATO+countries+call+disarmament/2620593/story.html
===============================
4. New Think and Old Weapons
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/opinion/28sun1.html
Editorial Published: February 27, 2010
Every four years the White House issues a “nuclear posture review.” That may sound like an anachronism. It isn’t. In a world where the United States and Russia still have more than 20,000 nuclear weapons — and Iran, North Korea and others have seemingly unquenchable nuclear appetites — what the United States says about its arsenal matters enormously.
President Obama’s review was due to Congress in December. That has been delayed, in part because of administration infighting. The president needs to get this right. It is his chance to finally jettison cold war doctrine and bolster America’s credibility as it presses to rein in Iran, North Korea and other proliferators.
Mr. Obama has already committed rhetorically to the vision of a world without nuclear weapons. But we are concerned that some of his advisers, especially at the Pentagon, are resisting his bold ambitions. He needs to stick with the ideas he articulated in his campaign and in speeches last year in Prague and at the United Nations.
MORE: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/opinion/28sun1.html
=============================
5. 'Very good year' for Cameco purchases.
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/
Very+good+year+Cameco/2616242/story.html
Company reports $1.1B in net earnings
By Cassandra Kyle, The StarPhoenixFebruary 26, 2010
Despite net earnings of $1.1 billion in 2009 and $1.3 billion in available cash, uranium giant Cameco Corp. continued to say Thursday it is in no rush to make any
The Saskatoon-based company, which reported its record annual earnings late Wednesday, said it will continue to focus on its plan to double annual production to 40 million pounds of U3O8 by 2018.
Cameco president and CEO Jerry Grandey said Thursday any business opportunities that come the company's way will be closely scrutinized.
"Let us be clear: The money is not burning a hole in our pockets," Grandey said in a conference call with analysts, investors and media.
"The financial position gives us great flexibility. We intend to take our time to ensure that any new investment will bring real value to our shareholders."
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/
Very+good+year+Cameco/2616242/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~
Nuclear power enjoying renaissance: Cameco CEO
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/02/25/
sk-cameco-nuclear-energy-uranium-jerry-grandey.html
Last Updated: Thursday, February 25, 2010 | 9:53 PM CT CBC News
Jerry Grandey, the president and CEO of uranium mining company Cameco, says the nuclear energy industry is entering a renaissance and he is looking forward to reaping the rewards for increased demand for reactor fuel.
"Our goal is to double our annual uranium production to help fuel the nuclear renaissance," Grandey said Thursday in a conference call with investment analysts and media.
During the call, Grandey spoke about rising demand for uranium to supply nuclear energy plants.
"Skeptics who dismiss the idea of a nuclear renaissance ignore the accelerating momentum," he said, referring to increased demand.
~ ~ ~ ~
Cameco Skywalk officially opens at RUH
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Cameco+Skywalk+officially+opens/2605046/story.html
The Star Phoenix February 24, 2010
Dignitaries on Tuesday unveiled the new look of one of the most travelled pedestrian corridors in Saskatoon.
The Cameco Skywalk at Royal University Hospital officially opened with an artistic flair courtesy of local artists.
"It's an impressive way to enter the hospital," said Cameco Corp. CEO Jerry Grandey.
The skywalk, the corridor connecting RUH and its parking lot, now features photographic murals of well-known Saskatoon cityscapes along the river and interior skyline paintings by young artists from Saskatoon Community Youth Arts Programming (SCYAP).
"For many people who enter this building, this will be the first thing they see and we hope it creates a sense of hope and healing," said Saskatoon Health Region president and CEO Maura Davies.
The RUH Foundation named the skywalk to recognize Cameco's $1.5- million contribution to the foundation's campaign that established the Cameco chair in aboriginal health at the University of Saskatchewan.
MORE:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/
Cameco+Skywalk+officially+opens/2605046/story.html
==========================
6. Tom Adams: Time to rethink AECL’s meltdown
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blog ... t/archive/
2010/02/25/tom-adams-time-to-rethink-aecl-s-meltdown.aspx
AECL, despite reviews and promises, has lost money every year since 1952
By Tom Adams, February 25, 2010, National Post
The next federal budget marks a historic opportunity to constrain the expanding liabilities of the Crown nuclear promotion agency, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), by finally killing off the Candu reactor expansion program.
Policy choices today are less about AECL’s contribution to the deficit next year and more about AECL’s deficit contribution five years or 50 years from now.
AECL’s bureaucratic survival since the 1950s has relied on hyping its status as a high-tech employment agency, promising future profits and morphing its mandate to take on new government objectives. AECL once hitched its wagon to regional development
where it now hangs on to climate change. Unlike real businesses, AECL’s ace in the hole has been its ability to develop an ever-expanding portfolio of liabilities and therefore a sustainable claim on federal taxpayers.
Notwithstanding a continuous process of management shake-ups, policy reviews, restructuring initiatives and turn-around plans, the federal “investment” in AECL has been cash-negative every year since AECL was formed in 1952.
The federal government has so far sunk over $21-billion into AECL in 2009 dollars, of which $1.3-billion was sunk in the last four years.
MORE:
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blog ... t/archive/
2010/02/25/tom-adams-time-to-rethink-aecl-s-meltdown.aspx
=============================
7. Water Issues Derailing Nuclear Power in Utah
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/26/
water-issues-derailing-nuclear-power-in-utah/
Posted by Tara Lohan at 9:30 am February 26, 2010
Nuclear power has been a hot topic these past few weeks with Vermont’s leaking reactor, Georgia’s plans for new ones (thanks to Obama), and the press’s blind approval of all things nuclear.
And now, Rachel Waldholz from High Country News, writes that Blue Castle Holdings, “a 3-year-old, politically connected startup” is trying to get Utah’s first new nuclear plant since 1987 built in the state.
While there are lots of reasons that nuclear power is a bad idea, residents in Utah are particularly concerned about water. Waldholz writes:
The first hurdle is more immediate. In the Utah desert, this possible climate change solution is colliding with one of its projected consequences: water scarcity.
Blue Castle needs some 50,000 acre-feet annually — enough water to supply up to 100,000 homes — to cool the reactors of its proposed 3,000 megawatt plant, which would produce enough electricity to power nearly 3 million households.
Apparently they hope to lease 53,600 acre-feet from upstream San Juan and Kane counties, but the plan is not without criticism, especially because in drought years water may go to more senior water holders and the project could be shorted.
MORE:
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/26/
water-issues-derailing-nuclear-power-in-utah/
============================
8. Giving Money to the Nuclear Industry Is Lunacy
http://blogs.alternet.org/justasoapboxo ... ar-lunacy/
Posted by beeden at 8:41 am February 18, 2010
Nuclear solutions to energy problems will never be the answer, for like the current oil turmoil, they are a finite, non-renewable resource. To spend billions and more billions on such an energy system is to remain blinkered to the excesses of the stockmarket and the propensity of a few to gamble with the planet’s future for some cold cash.
The history of the nuclear industry’s failure to provide safe and secure storage of its toxic waste has been an issue since its inception over fifty years ago. The poisoning of our most vital resource, water, for thousands of years, from its initial mining operations to the final cooling processes verges on insanity. I cannot for the life of me comprehend in any way, shape or form why this industry is being given further resources in a time of economic crisis.
There’s the proven non-environmentally destructive capacities of renewable energies, as in Spain recently; “For a brief period over the weekend, wind power supplied a record 40.8 percent of electricity consumed in the country, the national industry association reported on Tuesday.” These are yet to be globally embraced. And further along in the article, “Spain, which along with Germany and Denmark, is among the three biggest producers of wind power in the European Union, is aiming to triple the amount of energy it derives from renewable sources by 2020.” This would cover nearly all of the required energy demands of Spain, yet recalcitrant states around the globe cling to “old world” resource-based energy production that further exacerbates global warming.
MORE: http://blogs.alternet.org/justasoapboxo ... 010/02/18/
nuclear-lunacy/
=======================
9. Corporate Media Are Using Industry Talking Points to Lie to Us About Nuclear Power
http://www.alternet.org/story/145792/
By Rory O'Connor, MediaChannel.org
Posted on February 23, 2010, Printed on February 27, 2010
Nearly twenty years ago I co-wrote Nukespeak, a cultural history of the selling of nuclear technology for both peaceful and military purposes.
My co-authors and I dedicated the book to George Orwell, whose literary creation of 'newspeak' in the classic novel 1984 illustrated the power to control reality through the adroit manipulation of language. The euphemisms, obfuscations and omissions employed by nuclear boosters throughout both industry and government -- what one writer has called the "linguistic cosmetics" used "to avoid communicating uncomfortable or threatening thoughts so that the nuclear industry can control the images and perceptions of nuclear power" -- were so clearly reminiscent of Orwellian thought control that the homage seemed, if anything, perhaps a little too obvious.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145792/
===========================
10. Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama's Nuclear Power Proposal
http://www.truthout.org/
major-fallout-predicted-over-obamas-nuclear-power-proposal57088
Monday 22 February 2010
by: Grace Huang, t r u t h o u t | Report
While President Obama has announced an offer of $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for two new nuclear reactors, worries about potential cost overruns, health risks and safety concerns lead many to believe his proposal may cause far more harm than good - assuming that the reactors can be successfully built.
Should the builder borrow money and then default on the loan, the Obama administration's guarantee means that the lenders and investors would not suffer the financial loss. Instead, taxpayer money would be used to cover the cost.
Administration officials have said that the companies involved would pay fees to cover the possibility of default and that these loan guarantees would not cost taxpayers money. However, both the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office have estimated that the risk of default on a guarantee for new nuclear reactor construction could be as high as 50 percent.
Construction of nuclear reactors also consistently run into large cost and deadline overruns. The company that built the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia, where the two new reactors would be, initially estimated construction costs of $1 billion for four reactors. By 1989, that number had risen to $9 billion for only two reactors. Now, the estimate for the two new reactors is approximately $14 billion.
It is also difficult to finish building nuclear reactors on time. According to The New York Times, an analysis prepared for the German government in 2009 showed that of the 45 nuclear reactors under construction, 22 have run into delays. Some reactors overshot their budgets and deadlines or had faulty construction to the point that the projects were completely abandoned, losing billions of dollars in the process.
MORE:
http://www.truthout.org/
major-fallout-predicted-over-obamas-nuclear-power-proposal57088
==============================
11. Vermont Senate Votes to Close Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/25nuke.html
NY Times, Matthew Wald, February 24, 2010
MONTPELIER, Vt. - In an unusual state foray into nuclear regulation, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 Wednesday to block a license extension for the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, citing radioactive leaks, misstatements in testimony by plant officials and other problems.
Unless the chamber reverses itself, it would be the first time in more than 20 years that the public or its representatives decided to close a reactor.
The vote came barely over a week after President Obama declared a new era of rebirth for the nation's nuclear industry, announcing federal loan guarantees of $8.3 billion to assure the construction of a twin-reactor plant near Augusta, Ga.
MORE: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/25nuke.html
=========================
12. Land owners out of mind, out of site
http://www.smh.com.au/national/
land-owners-out-of-mind-out-of-site-20100226-p95w.html
LINDSAY MURDOCH AND TOM ARUP Sydney Morning Herald, Australia – February 27, 2010
* Nuclear waste dump plans are dividing an Aboriginal clan, write Lindsay Murdoch and Tom Arup. *
DIANNE STOKES says the Rudd government's decision to push ahead with plans to dump nuclear waste on land north of Tennant Creek has caused trouble in her Warlmanpa tribe.
"People have given away land that doesn't belong to them . now there is big trouble among us," she says.
For centuries, Aboriginal clans followed their dreaming across the gently sloping, low scrub land that became known last century by white people as Muckaty cattle station.
Now some members of one of those clans have agreed to allow Australia's first national waste dump to be established on 1.5 square kilometres of land they claim is theirs in return for $12 million, most of it in cash.
The terms of the agreement remain secret - even some members of the Ngapa clan who might get the money have not been given a copy.
The Federal Resources Minister, Martin Ferguson, revealed this week the government planned to pursue Muckaty as its nuclear dump site, saying it is the only place that had been "volunteered".
He introduced legislation in Parliament that gives his government the power to override a threat by the Northern Territory to block the dump being built at Muckaty, an earthquake-prone area 120 kilometres north of Tennant Creek.
If the dump - or radioactive waste repository as bureaucrats call it – is built, about 4000 cubic metres of waste that has been accumulating in small stores in southern states over the past 50 years would be transported there, by rail or road.
Trucks would move 2000 cubic metres of radioactive contaminated soil from the Woomera defence area in South Australia.
MORE:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/
land-owners-out-of-mind-out-of-site-20100226-p95w.html
=======================
13. Studsvik to recycle Finnish heat exchangers
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 02105.html
World Nuclear News, 19 February 2010
================================
Correction - An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Studsvik was to process used steam generators from the Olkiluoto plant. As a few readers have pointed out, Olkiluoto units 1 and 2 are boiling water reactors (BWRs) which, unlike pressurized water reactors (PWRs), do not have steam generators. Apologies for any confusion caused. - WNN
================================
Studsvik of Sweden has signed a contract with Finland's Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO) for the dismantling and metal recycling of old heat exchangers from the Olkiluoto nuclear power plant.
Studsvik's facility near Nyköping, Sweden, melts metal scrap, such as stainless steel, carbon steel, copper, aluminium or lead. Melting reduces the volume and weight of the waste, resulting in reduced costs for interim on-site storage and final disposal. The end-product is metal ingots, which can either be immediately free-released as conventional scrap metal or released after a period of decay storage. Residual products (slag, sorted material, cutting and blasting residues and dust from the ventilation filters) and ingots that cannot be free-released are returned to the customer.
Units 1 and 2 at TVO's Olkiluoto plant underwent an extensive modernization programme between 1995 and 1998. In both units, the steam separator, generator and main transformer were replaced; the internal components of the low-pressure turbines and the turbine control and protection system were replaced; and the high-pressure
turbine was modified.
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 02105.html
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
=========================
14. "Downstream" Film Showings in Alberta
http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2009/03/
downstream-film-showings-in-alberta.html
The screenings of DOWNSTREAM a documentary on the health concerns downstream from the oil sands are happening in Ft. Chipewyan Friday March 6, two screenings in Edmonton Sunday March 8 and Monday March 9th in Calgary.
TICKET INFO:
http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2009/03/
downstream-film-showings-in-alberta.html
Here is some of the promotional material for the film:
"DOWNSTREAM Canada, U.S.A., 2008, 33 minutes http://www.downstreamdoc.com/
At the heart of the multi-billion dollar tar sands industry in Northern Alberta, Dr. John O' Connor's career is jeopardized as he fights for the lives of the Aboriginal people living and dying of rare forms of cancer downstream from one of the largest oil operations in the world. Making the short-list for this year's Academy Award® Nominations for best short documentary, Downstream, provides an in-depth look at the impact oil sands extraction is taking on the surrounding communities."
"Witnessing unprecedented changes to their land, health and heritage, the people of Fort Chipewyan have struggled for years to have their concerns addressed by government and industry. Downstream has raised unparalleled awareness in Canada and the United States regarding the environmental, economic and social impacts of the tar sands on both sides of the border."
MORE:
http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2009/03/
downstream-film-showings-in-alberta.html
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS (1): March 6, 2010
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:35 am
NUKE NEWS (1): March 6, 2010
Compilation:
1. "Bottle Water Free Day!" - March 11, 2010!
2. DON'T WAIT, DON'T FORGET! SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP OBAMA'S $54 BILLION NUCLEAR BAILOUT!
3. B.C researcher probes soaring Iraq cancer rates
4. Budget to pump $400 million into AECL, other help for businesses
5. Canada’s Nuclear Position - Federal Throne Speech - March 3, 2010
6. Highlights from the Speech from the Throne – Council of Canadians
7. Concerns - Budget 2010 on trade, water and energy – Council of Canadians
8. Our choice of governments: Liars or Cowards by Murray Dobbin
9. ESSAY: 'Harper's assault on democracy' by Murray Dobbin – Part One of Ten
10. Annual General Meeting - May 8, 2010 - The Green Party of Saskatchewan’s (GPS)
11. Our Corrupt Nuclear Regulator - CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION (CNSC) – Pat McNamara
12. A Homeland "Security Blanket" for the Defense Industry: The Flawed Nuke Detection Program By Tom Burghardt
========================
1. "Bottle Water Free Day!" - March 11, 2010!
On March 11th the Polaris institute in partnership with the Canadian Federation of Students, and the Sierra Youth Coalition will launch a national day of action entitled "Bottle Water Free Day!"
The Canadian Labour Congress as well as many of our affiliates have joined the list of "Who's Onboard"!!
To find out more information on how to "sign the pledge" and encourage others to take part in the events happening across the country please visit: http://bottledwaterfreeday.ca/index2.php?section_id=22
Please circulate this important campaign information to your contacts, while encouraging the use of public water!
In Solidarity,
Erin Harrison, National Representative
CANADIAN LABOUR CONGRESS
2841 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, ON K1V 8X7
tel 613-521-3400 ext.234
fax 613-521-0423
eharrison@clc-ctc.ca
www.canadianlabour.ca
www.congresdutravail.ca
=========================
2. DON'T WAIT, DON'T FORGET! SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP OBAMA'S $54 BILLION NUCLEAR BAILOUT!
March 4, 2010
Dear Friends,
Since we launched it Tuesday afternoon, more than 2,200 people have signed the new petition against President Obama's proposed $54 billion loan program for new nuclear reactors.
That's great, thank you! But we can--and must--do a lot better than that if we're going to stop this fiasco.
If you haven't signed the petition yet, please do so here. (Note, please do not sign it twice, it will just make more work for us when we remove duplicate signatures....).
Please ask your family members and friends to sign. Organizations: please send to your e-mail lists. Here is the direct link you can use: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/550 ... n_KEY=2096
We are already making progress. Yesterday, the Brattleboro (VT) Reformer reported that Vermont's entire Congressional Delegation say they will oppose this loan "guarantee" program. We have reason to believe several other members of Congress will be jumping on this bandwagon soon. On March 23, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), chair of the House Oversight Domestic Policy Subcommittee, will be holding a hearing to critically examine the program.
We also want to thank everyone who has contributed financially this week. We're now down to needing less than $1,000 to be able to buy an ad to promote this petition! Please consider helping us make that goal so we can continue reaching out to new people who care about this critical issue. Our donation page is here (or, if you don't like giving online, you can write a check to NIRS, and send to 6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912).
Finally, we wanted to bring your attention to a terrific op-ed by former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford. Although it's aimed at Minnesota, where legislators are considering a bill to repeal that state's ban on new reactor construction, it's an excellent summary of the issues that could affect everyone--especially those of you in states targeted by the nuclear industry for changes in state laws.
Again, please sign the petition, and please help us spread the word.
Thanks for all you do,
Michael Mariotte, Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
===========================
3. B.C researcher probes soaring Iraq cancer rates
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/
researcher+probes+soaring+Iraq+cancer+rates/2638425/story.html
By Randy Shore, Vancouver Sun March 3, 2010 6:02 PM
VANCOUVER — A researcher from Simon Fraser University is investigating childhood leukemia in southern Iraq, where the rate of the blood cancer in some areas is now four times that of neighbouring Kuwait.
Tim Takaro and his associates from the University of Washington, Mustansiriya University in Baghdad and Basrah University said in a newly published study that the rate of leukemia in children under 15 from Basrah rose to 8.5 cases per 100,000 from three per 100,000 over the 15-year study period. The rate in nearby Kuwait is two per 100,000.
The intensity and duration of armed conflict in Basrah has presented researchers with a natural laboratory to conduct their search for the causes of childhood leukemia, Takaro said.
Basrah was at the centre of nearly continuous armed conflict — including attacks by the U.S. military — during the 15-year period of data collection, which ended in 2007.
The area was also a frequent attack target during the 1980-88 war with Iran. The rates climbed most sharply in the last three years of the study period, after the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States.
The leukemia numbers are particularly shocking because the rate of the disease tends to be low in poor and developing nations, lower even than the western world, said Takaro.
"To find these numbers in Iraq was surprising to us," he said. "The next question is: Why is this happening?"
Takaro speculated that further study may reveal the specific causes of childhood leukemia.
"It's impossible to say without further study why (rates in Basrah) are going up," Takaro said. "But this may be an unintended result of armed conflict."
Basrah offers several likely candidates, from the hundreds of oil wells set ablaze by Saddam Hussein's forces in 1991 to depleted uranium shell casings used by the U.S. in Operation Desert Storm and the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and benzene, a known carcinogen that is present in gasoline and occurs naturally in pools of crude oil that dot the landscape of Basrah. Children in Basrah are also sometimes used in the local black market trade in gasoline, which is distributed using mouth-operated siphon hoses.
MORE:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/
researcher+probes+soaring+Iraq+cancer+rates/2638425/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
WATCH: David Orchard on Depleted Uranium - Face to Face with Jack Etkin: #15 - December 20, 2009
http://vimeo.com/8286563
In our 15th episode, Jack joins author, Canadian nationalist, activist and organic farmer David Orchard for a rousing discussion on such topics as depleted uranium, organic farming, dirty politics and war. David Orchard is a true Canadian hero and man of integrity. A Canadian national treasure to be sure.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
WATCH: Poison bullets: Depleted Uranium factor covered-up?
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/
poison-bullets-depleted-uranium-factor-covered-up/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DandelionSalad+%28Dandelion+Salad%29
Posted on January 5, 2010 by dandelionsalad
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/
RussiaToday January 05, 2010
Many American and British soldiers who have returned from Iraq are complaining about Depleted Uranium-related illnesses. They accuse both the Pentagon and the UK Ministry of Defense of covering up the problem.
Poison Bullets follows doctors and experts as they voice their opposing views in the DU controversy and travels to the US, Great Britain, Jordan, Iraq and Spain, where we meet many of those who are victims of both DU-related diseases and the indifference of government officials.
from the archives:
Dennis Kyne: Depleted Uranium (DU) and Very Sick Soldiers and the Cover-Up
The medical and economic costs of nuclear power by Dr Helen Caldicott
Nuclear Madness – Interview with Dr. Helen Caldicott (must see video)
Depleted Uranium
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cancer Spreading In Iraq due to Depleted Uranium Weapons
http://dailycensored.com/2010/01/10/
cancer-spreading-in-iraq-due-to-depleted-uranium-weapons/
The Daily Censored January 11, 2010
Cancer is spreading like wildfire in Iraq. Thousands of infants are being born with deformities. Doctors say they are struggling to cope with the rise of cancer and birth defects, especially in cities subjected to heavy American and British bombardment.
Dr Ahmad Hardan, who served as a special scientific adviser to the World Health Organization, the United Nations and the Iraqi Ministry of Health, says that there is scientific evidence linking depleted uranium to cancer and birth defects. He told Al Jazeera English [3], "Children with congenital anomalies are subjected to karyotyping and chromosomal studies with complete genetic back-grounding and clinical assessment. Family and obstetrical histories are taken too. These international studies have produced ample evidence to show that depleted uranium has disastrous consequences."
Iraqi doctors say cancer cases increased after both the 1991 war and the 2003 invasion. Abdulhaq Al-Ani, author of "Uranium in Iraq" told Al Jazeera English [4] that the incubation period for depleted uranium is five to six years, which is consistent with the spike in cancer rates in 1996-1997 and 2008-2009.
Not everyone is ready to draw a direct correlation between allied bombing of these areas and tumors, and the Pentagon has been skeptical of any attempts to link the two. But Iraqi doctors and some Western scholars say the massive quantities of depleted uranium used in U.S. and British bombs, and the sharp increase in cancer rates are not unconnected.
MORE:
http://dailycensored.com/2010/01/10/
cancer-spreading-in-iraq-due-to-depleted-uranium-weapons/
========================
4. Budget to pump $400 million into AECL, other help for businesses
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
budget-to-pump-400-million-into-aecl-extend-tax-breaks-for-machinery-86289002.html
By: Julian Beltrame, THE CANADIAN PRESS 3/03/2010 10:37 PM |
The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION
OTTAWA - The Harper government is unveiling what is expected to be its last free-spending budget Thursday, with money for infrastructure, businesses and a new lifeline to the atomic energy industry.
While Finance Minister Jim Flaherty will declare the spigot will finally be turned off on March 31, 2011, this year will also see $19 billion in previously-announced stimulus - and a few surprises.
The Canadian Press has learned that $400 million will go to Atomic Energy of Canada in an effort to reposition the troubled nuclear energy firm to sell its Candu reactors division.
The government said in Wednesday's throne speech that it would invest in clean energy technologies, adding:
"And it will position Canada's nuclear industry to capitalize on the opportunities of the global nuclear renaissance - beginning with the restructuring of (AECL)."
MORE: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
budget-to-pump-400-million-into-aecl-extend-tax-breaks-for-machinery-86289002.html
=========================
5. Canada’s Nuclear Position - Federal Throne Speech - March 3, 2010
From: Lindsay Telfer
To: AEN Nuclear
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Subject: Fwd: Speech from the throne full text
Thought folks might be interested in this line from the Federal Throne Speech today...
http://www.sft-ddt.gc.ca/grfx/docs/sft-ddt-2010_e.pdf
* Our Government will continue to invest in clean energy technologies. It will review energy efficiency and emissions-reduction programs to ensure they are effective.
And it will position Canada's nuclear industry to capitalize on the opportunities of the global nuclear renaissance beginning with the restructuring of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.
Lindsay
Sierra Club
============================
6. Highlights from the Speech from the Throne – Council of Canadians
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 7:18 AM
Yesterday's Speech from the Throne included references to the Harper government's agenda in the areas of trade, energy and water.
We will monitor these commitments, provide critical commentary through our website and media work, and campaign actively against those measures that harm the public interest.
The Harper government says it will:
TRADE
- "implement free trade agreements with Peru and the European Free Trade Association and ask Parliament to ratify new agreements with Colombia, Jordan and Panama"
- "aggressively diversify opportunities for Canadian business through bilateral trade agreements"
- "continue trade negotiations with the European Union, India, the Republic of Korea, the Caribbean Community and other countries of the Americas"
- "build upon the recent agreement that gives Canadian companies permanent access to state and local government procurement in the United States"
ENERGY
- "untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates (oil and gas) project approvals"
- "ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada’s uranium mining industry by unduly restricting foreign investment"
- "reform the northern regulatory regime to ensure that the region’s resource potential can be developed where commercially viable"
- "provide funding to help developing economies reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change"
- "continue to take steps to fight climate change by leading the world in clean electricity generation"
- "work to reduce emissions through the Canada-U.S. Clean Energy Dialogue launched last year with President Obama’s administration"
WATER
- "introduce new legislative measures to further this goal (of making safe drinking water and effective waste-water treatment on-reserve a national priority)"
- "bolster its Action Plan on Clean Water"
- "advocate greater investment in maternal and child health in developing countries"
OTHER
- "open Canada’s doors further to venture capital and to foreign investment in key sectors, including the satellite and telecommunications industries..."
- "take steps to endorse this aspirational document (the United Nations Declaration on Indigenous Rights) in a manner fully consistent with Canada’s Constitution and laws"
The full Speech from the Throne is at http://www.speech.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1388.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
=======================
7. Concerns - Budget 2010 on trade, water and energy – Council of Canadians
From: Brent Patterson
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:08 AM
The Council of Canadians has numerous concerns with the Harper government's Budget 2010 in the areas of trade, water and energy.
While a fuller analysis will follow, a few of the worst aspects of it for us include:
TRADE
In Budget 2010, the Harper government commits itself to "resist trade protectionism" and support "open markets". It says it will promote "free trade" through "unilateral action to eliminate tariffs and support for the completion of the Doha Round, and through an aggressive bilateral free trade strategy that currently includes efforts to complete a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union, exploratory talks with India, and the implementation of recently concluded agreements with Colombia, Panama and Jordan".
Budget 2010 eliminates almost "all remaining tariffs on manufacturing inputs and machinery and equipment" immediately and the remainder by 2015. The government says, "this will make all of Canada a tariff-free zone for industrial manufacturers" and adds that "this approach is superior to efforts by other countries that focus on location-specific free trade zones".
As such, the Harper government remains fixated on a so-called free trade agenda that limits real job creation, further opens our economy to foreign ownership, continues to put our water, energy and public services at risk, and gives undue power to corporations to sue governments through Chapter 11 like provisions when their profits may be affected by public interest and environmental legislation.
WATER
While the government acknowledges that "millions of Canadians depend on the Great Lakes for their drinking water" and says that "cleaning up the Great Lakes is a key objective of our Government's Action Plan for Clean Water", the government allocates a mere $8 million a year to Environment Canada to "implement its action plan to protect the Great Lakes".
In contrast, at the end of last year, the US Congress authorized $475 million to be spent on cleaning up the Great Lakes. In February, US President Barack Obama proposed another $300 million into this program. And just this past October the Harper government lobbied the US Environmental Protection Agency to weaken and delay their tough new measures against ship-diesel exhaust on the Great Lakes aimed at reducing the health toll from air pollution. The federal government is simply not serious about protecting the Great Lakes.
With respect to water in First Nations communities, the government says it "will undertake a comprehensive review of its current approach to financing First Nations infrastructure" in order to "support access by First Nations to alternative sources of financing, and approaches to improve the life-cycle management of capital assets". This raises the spectre of private-public partnerships and all-out privatization, rather than the public provision of water and the recognition of the human right to water.
And while taking no real action to protect or conserve water, the budget allocates $18.4 million over two years to the Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators initiative, which the government says "produces a coherent set of indicators on water quality, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions over time."
ENERGY
The Harper government states that "Canada has established itself as an energy superpower" and notes the "unprecedented opportunities" to export "energy products within an integrated North American energy market and to the rest of the world". It promotes Canada as an "increasingly attractive destination for global investment" to "tap our abundant energy potential".
It wants to support this by accelerating "regulatory reviews of major energy projects", like the environmentally-destructive projects in the tar sands. It says "responsibility for conducting environmental assessments for energy projects will be delegated from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for projects falling under their respective areas of expertise."
The government also says "the resource potential in Canada's North is world-class" but that "potential investors in northern resource projects face complex and overlapping regulatory processes". To remove these "unpredictable, costly and time-consuming" protections, they will spend $11 million over two years "to support the acceleration of the review of resource projects in the North". This undoubtedly is driven by the US Geological Survey reporting in July 2008 that the Arctic Circle has 90 billion barrels of ‘technically recoverable’ oil and 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
The Harper government also continues to support "the development of advanced clean energy solutions, such as carbon capture and storage technologies" that are environmentally problematic and have been promoted, despite evidence to the contrary, as a way to green the tar sands. Even an Alberta-Canada EcoEnergy Task Force report released in January 2008 says that only a small percentage of CO2 emitted from the tar sands is currently amenable to the technology because of the size and concentrations of the emission streams.
CBC.ca reports that, "The Council of Canadians said the Conservative government has let down people concerned with the state of the environment. Andrea Harden-Donahue, the council's national environmental campaigner, said there was barely a mention about the environment or creating green jobs. 'Really, it's surprising because this is the way the world is moving. Now, we need to review the budget and see what numbers are going where, but certainly from the speech itself, there's no indication that this is a priority for the government,' Harden-Donahue said."
This article is at
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2010/03/04/
ns-federal-budget-reaction.html.
There are many other problems with this budget - including the opening of the telecommunications sector to foreign ownership and the further cutting of already minimal corporate taxes (down to 15 percent by 2012) - that all indicate the Harper government is taking Canada in the wrong direction.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
=============================
8. Our choice of governments: Liars or Cowards by Murray Dobbin
http://murraydobbin.ca/2010/03/03/
our-choice-of-governments-liars-or-cowards/
Posted: 03 Mar 2010 05:36 PM PST
The throne speech should have been the most important political news of the last few days but, not surprisingly, the Harper government came up with almost nothing. To be sure, there were more hints about handing the economy over [to] the US – what passes for economic policy from a man enamored with unregulated US capitalism. More free trade, opening up telecom and other areas to foreign investment, pushing P3s (public private partnerships) and reinforcing his commitment to the next phases of corporate tax cuts. He will re-introduce his crime bills in their original form and now count on his plurality in the senate to get through un-amended.
But more important, as they are reminders of the depressing deadlock Canadian democracy finds itself in, were statements from Michael Ignatieff and Harper's right hand man, Jason Kenny. The first reminds us of why we never, ever want Ignatieff to have a majority government. The latter reminds us of how totally corrupt the current government is – a governnment of liars who use the political authority given to them to pursue their own personal agendas, the law and integrity be damned.
Ignatieff distinguished himself with a truly despicable diatribe about Israeli Apartheid Week – denouncing it as anti-Semitism and using the same offensive intimidation tactics used by B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress against any criticism of Israel.
MORE: http://murraydobbin.ca/2010/03/03/
our-choice-of-governments-liars-or-cowards/
=====================
9. ESSAY: 'Harper's assault on democracy' by Murray Dobbin – Part 1 of 10
http://rabble.ca/news/2010/03/harpers-assault-democracy
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:33 AM
Rabble.ca columnist Murray Dobbin details the harm Prime Minister Stephen Harper is doing to the political and social fabric of Canada in a new essay commissioned by The Council of Canadians.
This article - http://rabble.ca/news/2010/03/harpers-assault-democracy - is an excerpt taken from the essay, the first in a 10-part series on Harper's assault on democracy.
Part two of Murray Dobbin's series is on the implications of the two prorogations of Parliament. It will be published tomorrow, March 4, to coincide with the federal budget and the reconvening of Parliament. The results are due out shortly of a major poll by Environics on proportional representation, made for The Council of Canadians.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
===========================
10. Annual General Meeting - May 8, 2010 - The Green Party of Saskatchewan’s (GPS)
More Details to Follow. Watch http://www.saskgreen.ca/
Take Action, Make Change, Run for the Party Executive!
We are now seeking nominations for the party executive. Members of the executive influence the direction of the party throughout the year. This is your chance to create change, to inspire political action, and make a difference. The executive is composed of six positions that are elected every year: Party Leader, Party President, Deputy Leader, Party Vice-President, Secretary, and Treasurer.
Nominations for Executive must be received by March 8, 2010, two months prior to the AGM.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
EXCERPT from GPS Policy:
Nuclear and uranium policy from the 2007 "Green Book":
http://www.saskgreen.ca/policy/nuclear_and_uranium
Nuclear and uranium spokesperson: Rob Cram (306-373-1587 / robcram@shaw.ca)
The Green Party of Saskatchewan is opposed to nuclear power for the following reasons:
Nuclear power is fiscally unsound. The last nuclear power plant in Canada came in seven times over budget, costing $14 billion dollars. This does not include the high cost involved in decommissioning old power plants.
Nuclear waste cannot be stored, treated, or disposed of safely.
A large amount of radioactive tailings accumulate as a result of uranium mining. These tailings can leak into groundwater and affect the surrounding area, leading to increased cancer rates.
Depleted uranium ends up in weapons such as missiles and anti-tank bullets.
Nuclear power is NOT emmisions free. Large quantities of greenhouse gases are produced in the mining and refining of uranium as well as during the long construction period of the power plant.
We will phase out uranium mining in Saskatchewan, compensating those affected during transition.
========================
11. Our Corrupt Nuclear Regulator - CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION (CNSC) – Pat McNamara
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1581#1581
We caught the CNSC with their pants down on their first trip into Alberta. The CNSC repeatedly refused our community’s requests to come and explain the regulatory process yet we’ve now confirmed they’ve met with First Nations friends up to 500 km. away. Why don’t the people living closest to the proposed reactor site have the same rights as First Nations?
The CNSC introduced itself to the Peace Country the same way the nuclear industry did; by holding secret meetings to get select groups onside before they spoke to the public. After weeks of denial by the CNSC and our MP Chris Warkentin, the truth came out on February 16. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) confirmed that the CNSC and the CEAA met with First Nations bands during the past two years.
The CNSC and the CEAA should be commended for consulting people living so far away, but they must also be held accountable for refusing to meet with the people who are, and will be most affected by the nuclear proposal. The CNSC doesn’t want to come to our community because 85% of us are opposed to the nuclear project and we’re very well-informed on nuclear issues. We’re not a “willing host community” but the CNSC doesn’t want to hear that.
We have no way of knowing how many secret meetings they’ve held as this is the first time they were caught doing it. However, the first evidence we have of the CNSC’s involvement was a Whitecourt Star article from July 17, 2007. Reporter Chandra Lye writes: “He (Wayne Henuset) added that they intended to make a decision by the end of September but that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has asked them to indicate a preferred location by the end of July”.
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1581#1581
Pat McNamara
Weberville Area Connection
entwork@hotmail.com
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Check out the CNSC website and look for various power point presentations by CNSC President Binder.
After Linda Keen was fired. he was appointed the President of the CNSC. He is openly and unabashedly the salesman and promoter for the nuclear industry. Can the CNSC really be trusted in protecting Canadians? Read on.....
CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION:
http://www.cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca/eng/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org
========================
12. A Homeland "Security Blanket" for the Defense Industry: The Flawed Nuke Detection Program By Tom Burghardt
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17849
Global Research, March 1, 2010Antifascist Calling... - 2010-02-28
Though production lines at the fear factory are still in overdrive, the Department of Homeland Security's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) are scrapping plans for a new generation of "high-tech detectors for screening vehicles and cargo, saying they cost too much and do not work as effectively as security officials once maintained," The Washington Post reported.
Nearly two years ago, Antifascist Calling revealed that when DNDO awarded contracts totaling some $1.2 billion over five years to defense and security giants Raytheon, Canberra Industries (a subsidiary of the French nuclear manufacturing titan, the Areva Group) and Thermo Scientific for Advanced Spectroscopic Portal (ASP) radiation monitors in 2006, it should have been "reality-check time."
For the moment at least, it apparently is.
As late as January 2010, despite revelations that the program widely missed the mark, DNDO officials claimed that the ASP "will enhance current detection capabilities by more clearly identifying the source of detected radiation through spectroscopic isotope identification."
Notwithstanding persistent flaws and cost overruns dogging the program, the Department of Homeland Security asked for $41M in its 2011 budget request "for the procurement and deployment of radiological and nuclear detection systems and equipment to support efforts across the Department."
Why would they do that? For answers, we'd better consult defense and security powerhouse Raytheon, the project's prime contractor.
A Homeland "Security Blanket" for the Defense Industry
Clocking-in at No. 5 on Washington Technology's 2009 "Top 100 List" of Federal Prime Contractors, the company pulled-down some $5,942,575,316 in defense and security-related contracts from the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, NASA, the armed forces and Department of Homeland Security.
According to Raytheon, "ASP detectors address the threat of radiological dispersal devices, improvised nuclear devices or a nuclear weapon being used by terrorists inside the United States," therefore "a more discriminating primary screening system--the ASP--is needed."
Touted as a next-gen "homeland security tool" that would provide Customs and Border Protection inspectors with the capability to detect illicit nuclear or radiological materials inside containers entering American ports, "with low false alarm rates" to boot, despite hundreds of millions of dollars poured into the program, the ASP performs no better than devices in place today.
As with existent monitors, the ASP was unable to distinguish between components required to manufacture a radiological dirty bomb from natural radiation emitters such as--wait!-- kitty litter, ceramics or bananas!
MORE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17849
Compilation:
1. "Bottle Water Free Day!" - March 11, 2010!
2. DON'T WAIT, DON'T FORGET! SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP OBAMA'S $54 BILLION NUCLEAR BAILOUT!
3. B.C researcher probes soaring Iraq cancer rates
4. Budget to pump $400 million into AECL, other help for businesses
5. Canada’s Nuclear Position - Federal Throne Speech - March 3, 2010
6. Highlights from the Speech from the Throne – Council of Canadians
7. Concerns - Budget 2010 on trade, water and energy – Council of Canadians
8. Our choice of governments: Liars or Cowards by Murray Dobbin
9. ESSAY: 'Harper's assault on democracy' by Murray Dobbin – Part One of Ten
10. Annual General Meeting - May 8, 2010 - The Green Party of Saskatchewan’s (GPS)
11. Our Corrupt Nuclear Regulator - CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION (CNSC) – Pat McNamara
12. A Homeland "Security Blanket" for the Defense Industry: The Flawed Nuke Detection Program By Tom Burghardt
========================
1. "Bottle Water Free Day!" - March 11, 2010!
On March 11th the Polaris institute in partnership with the Canadian Federation of Students, and the Sierra Youth Coalition will launch a national day of action entitled "Bottle Water Free Day!"
The Canadian Labour Congress as well as many of our affiliates have joined the list of "Who's Onboard"!!
To find out more information on how to "sign the pledge" and encourage others to take part in the events happening across the country please visit: http://bottledwaterfreeday.ca/index2.php?section_id=22
Please circulate this important campaign information to your contacts, while encouraging the use of public water!
In Solidarity,
Erin Harrison, National Representative
CANADIAN LABOUR CONGRESS
2841 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, ON K1V 8X7
tel 613-521-3400 ext.234
fax 613-521-0423
eharrison@clc-ctc.ca
www.canadianlabour.ca
www.congresdutravail.ca
=========================
2. DON'T WAIT, DON'T FORGET! SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP OBAMA'S $54 BILLION NUCLEAR BAILOUT!
March 4, 2010
Dear Friends,
Since we launched it Tuesday afternoon, more than 2,200 people have signed the new petition against President Obama's proposed $54 billion loan program for new nuclear reactors.
That's great, thank you! But we can--and must--do a lot better than that if we're going to stop this fiasco.
If you haven't signed the petition yet, please do so here. (Note, please do not sign it twice, it will just make more work for us when we remove duplicate signatures....).
Please ask your family members and friends to sign. Organizations: please send to your e-mail lists. Here is the direct link you can use: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/550 ... n_KEY=2096
We are already making progress. Yesterday, the Brattleboro (VT) Reformer reported that Vermont's entire Congressional Delegation say they will oppose this loan "guarantee" program. We have reason to believe several other members of Congress will be jumping on this bandwagon soon. On March 23, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), chair of the House Oversight Domestic Policy Subcommittee, will be holding a hearing to critically examine the program.
We also want to thank everyone who has contributed financially this week. We're now down to needing less than $1,000 to be able to buy an ad to promote this petition! Please consider helping us make that goal so we can continue reaching out to new people who care about this critical issue. Our donation page is here (or, if you don't like giving online, you can write a check to NIRS, and send to 6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912).
Finally, we wanted to bring your attention to a terrific op-ed by former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford. Although it's aimed at Minnesota, where legislators are considering a bill to repeal that state's ban on new reactor construction, it's an excellent summary of the issues that could affect everyone--especially those of you in states targeted by the nuclear industry for changes in state laws.
Again, please sign the petition, and please help us spread the word.
Thanks for all you do,
Michael Mariotte, Executive Director
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
nirsnet@nirs.org
www.nirs.org
===========================
3. B.C researcher probes soaring Iraq cancer rates
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/
researcher+probes+soaring+Iraq+cancer+rates/2638425/story.html
By Randy Shore, Vancouver Sun March 3, 2010 6:02 PM
VANCOUVER — A researcher from Simon Fraser University is investigating childhood leukemia in southern Iraq, where the rate of the blood cancer in some areas is now four times that of neighbouring Kuwait.
Tim Takaro and his associates from the University of Washington, Mustansiriya University in Baghdad and Basrah University said in a newly published study that the rate of leukemia in children under 15 from Basrah rose to 8.5 cases per 100,000 from three per 100,000 over the 15-year study period. The rate in nearby Kuwait is two per 100,000.
The intensity and duration of armed conflict in Basrah has presented researchers with a natural laboratory to conduct their search for the causes of childhood leukemia, Takaro said.
Basrah was at the centre of nearly continuous armed conflict — including attacks by the U.S. military — during the 15-year period of data collection, which ended in 2007.
The area was also a frequent attack target during the 1980-88 war with Iran. The rates climbed most sharply in the last three years of the study period, after the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States.
The leukemia numbers are particularly shocking because the rate of the disease tends to be low in poor and developing nations, lower even than the western world, said Takaro.
"To find these numbers in Iraq was surprising to us," he said. "The next question is: Why is this happening?"
Takaro speculated that further study may reveal the specific causes of childhood leukemia.
"It's impossible to say without further study why (rates in Basrah) are going up," Takaro said. "But this may be an unintended result of armed conflict."
Basrah offers several likely candidates, from the hundreds of oil wells set ablaze by Saddam Hussein's forces in 1991 to depleted uranium shell casings used by the U.S. in Operation Desert Storm and the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and benzene, a known carcinogen that is present in gasoline and occurs naturally in pools of crude oil that dot the landscape of Basrah. Children in Basrah are also sometimes used in the local black market trade in gasoline, which is distributed using mouth-operated siphon hoses.
MORE:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/
researcher+probes+soaring+Iraq+cancer+rates/2638425/story.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
WATCH: David Orchard on Depleted Uranium - Face to Face with Jack Etkin: #15 - December 20, 2009
http://vimeo.com/8286563
In our 15th episode, Jack joins author, Canadian nationalist, activist and organic farmer David Orchard for a rousing discussion on such topics as depleted uranium, organic farming, dirty politics and war. David Orchard is a true Canadian hero and man of integrity. A Canadian national treasure to be sure.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
WATCH: Poison bullets: Depleted Uranium factor covered-up?
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/
poison-bullets-depleted-uranium-factor-covered-up/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DandelionSalad+%28Dandelion+Salad%29
Posted on January 5, 2010 by dandelionsalad
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/
RussiaToday January 05, 2010
Many American and British soldiers who have returned from Iraq are complaining about Depleted Uranium-related illnesses. They accuse both the Pentagon and the UK Ministry of Defense of covering up the problem.
Poison Bullets follows doctors and experts as they voice their opposing views in the DU controversy and travels to the US, Great Britain, Jordan, Iraq and Spain, where we meet many of those who are victims of both DU-related diseases and the indifference of government officials.
from the archives:
Dennis Kyne: Depleted Uranium (DU) and Very Sick Soldiers and the Cover-Up
The medical and economic costs of nuclear power by Dr Helen Caldicott
Nuclear Madness – Interview with Dr. Helen Caldicott (must see video)
Depleted Uranium
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cancer Spreading In Iraq due to Depleted Uranium Weapons
http://dailycensored.com/2010/01/10/
cancer-spreading-in-iraq-due-to-depleted-uranium-weapons/
The Daily Censored January 11, 2010
Cancer is spreading like wildfire in Iraq. Thousands of infants are being born with deformities. Doctors say they are struggling to cope with the rise of cancer and birth defects, especially in cities subjected to heavy American and British bombardment.
Dr Ahmad Hardan, who served as a special scientific adviser to the World Health Organization, the United Nations and the Iraqi Ministry of Health, says that there is scientific evidence linking depleted uranium to cancer and birth defects. He told Al Jazeera English [3], "Children with congenital anomalies are subjected to karyotyping and chromosomal studies with complete genetic back-grounding and clinical assessment. Family and obstetrical histories are taken too. These international studies have produced ample evidence to show that depleted uranium has disastrous consequences."
Iraqi doctors say cancer cases increased after both the 1991 war and the 2003 invasion. Abdulhaq Al-Ani, author of "Uranium in Iraq" told Al Jazeera English [4] that the incubation period for depleted uranium is five to six years, which is consistent with the spike in cancer rates in 1996-1997 and 2008-2009.
Not everyone is ready to draw a direct correlation between allied bombing of these areas and tumors, and the Pentagon has been skeptical of any attempts to link the two. But Iraqi doctors and some Western scholars say the massive quantities of depleted uranium used in U.S. and British bombs, and the sharp increase in cancer rates are not unconnected.
MORE:
http://dailycensored.com/2010/01/10/
cancer-spreading-in-iraq-due-to-depleted-uranium-weapons/
========================
4. Budget to pump $400 million into AECL, other help for businesses
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
budget-to-pump-400-million-into-aecl-extend-tax-breaks-for-machinery-86289002.html
By: Julian Beltrame, THE CANADIAN PRESS 3/03/2010 10:37 PM |
The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION
OTTAWA - The Harper government is unveiling what is expected to be its last free-spending budget Thursday, with money for infrastructure, businesses and a new lifeline to the atomic energy industry.
While Finance Minister Jim Flaherty will declare the spigot will finally be turned off on March 31, 2011, this year will also see $19 billion in previously-announced stimulus - and a few surprises.
The Canadian Press has learned that $400 million will go to Atomic Energy of Canada in an effort to reposition the troubled nuclear energy firm to sell its Candu reactors division.
The government said in Wednesday's throne speech that it would invest in clean energy technologies, adding:
"And it will position Canada's nuclear industry to capitalize on the opportunities of the global nuclear renaissance - beginning with the restructuring of (AECL)."
MORE: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
budget-to-pump-400-million-into-aecl-extend-tax-breaks-for-machinery-86289002.html
=========================
5. Canada’s Nuclear Position - Federal Throne Speech - March 3, 2010
From: Lindsay Telfer
To: AEN Nuclear
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Subject: Fwd: Speech from the throne full text
Thought folks might be interested in this line from the Federal Throne Speech today...
http://www.sft-ddt.gc.ca/grfx/docs/sft-ddt-2010_e.pdf
* Our Government will continue to invest in clean energy technologies. It will review energy efficiency and emissions-reduction programs to ensure they are effective.
And it will position Canada's nuclear industry to capitalize on the opportunities of the global nuclear renaissance beginning with the restructuring of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.
Lindsay
Sierra Club
============================
6. Highlights from the Speech from the Throne – Council of Canadians
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 7:18 AM
Yesterday's Speech from the Throne included references to the Harper government's agenda in the areas of trade, energy and water.
We will monitor these commitments, provide critical commentary through our website and media work, and campaign actively against those measures that harm the public interest.
The Harper government says it will:
TRADE
- "implement free trade agreements with Peru and the European Free Trade Association and ask Parliament to ratify new agreements with Colombia, Jordan and Panama"
- "aggressively diversify opportunities for Canadian business through bilateral trade agreements"
- "continue trade negotiations with the European Union, India, the Republic of Korea, the Caribbean Community and other countries of the Americas"
- "build upon the recent agreement that gives Canadian companies permanent access to state and local government procurement in the United States"
ENERGY
- "untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates (oil and gas) project approvals"
- "ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada’s uranium mining industry by unduly restricting foreign investment"
- "reform the northern regulatory regime to ensure that the region’s resource potential can be developed where commercially viable"
- "provide funding to help developing economies reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change"
- "continue to take steps to fight climate change by leading the world in clean electricity generation"
- "work to reduce emissions through the Canada-U.S. Clean Energy Dialogue launched last year with President Obama’s administration"
WATER
- "introduce new legislative measures to further this goal (of making safe drinking water and effective waste-water treatment on-reserve a national priority)"
- "bolster its Action Plan on Clean Water"
- "advocate greater investment in maternal and child health in developing countries"
OTHER
- "open Canada’s doors further to venture capital and to foreign investment in key sectors, including the satellite and telecommunications industries..."
- "take steps to endorse this aspirational document (the United Nations Declaration on Indigenous Rights) in a manner fully consistent with Canada’s Constitution and laws"
The full Speech from the Throne is at http://www.speech.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1388.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
=======================
7. Concerns - Budget 2010 on trade, water and energy – Council of Canadians
From: Brent Patterson
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:08 AM
The Council of Canadians has numerous concerns with the Harper government's Budget 2010 in the areas of trade, water and energy.
While a fuller analysis will follow, a few of the worst aspects of it for us include:
TRADE
In Budget 2010, the Harper government commits itself to "resist trade protectionism" and support "open markets". It says it will promote "free trade" through "unilateral action to eliminate tariffs and support for the completion of the Doha Round, and through an aggressive bilateral free trade strategy that currently includes efforts to complete a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union, exploratory talks with India, and the implementation of recently concluded agreements with Colombia, Panama and Jordan".
Budget 2010 eliminates almost "all remaining tariffs on manufacturing inputs and machinery and equipment" immediately and the remainder by 2015. The government says, "this will make all of Canada a tariff-free zone for industrial manufacturers" and adds that "this approach is superior to efforts by other countries that focus on location-specific free trade zones".
As such, the Harper government remains fixated on a so-called free trade agenda that limits real job creation, further opens our economy to foreign ownership, continues to put our water, energy and public services at risk, and gives undue power to corporations to sue governments through Chapter 11 like provisions when their profits may be affected by public interest and environmental legislation.
WATER
While the government acknowledges that "millions of Canadians depend on the Great Lakes for their drinking water" and says that "cleaning up the Great Lakes is a key objective of our Government's Action Plan for Clean Water", the government allocates a mere $8 million a year to Environment Canada to "implement its action plan to protect the Great Lakes".
In contrast, at the end of last year, the US Congress authorized $475 million to be spent on cleaning up the Great Lakes. In February, US President Barack Obama proposed another $300 million into this program. And just this past October the Harper government lobbied the US Environmental Protection Agency to weaken and delay their tough new measures against ship-diesel exhaust on the Great Lakes aimed at reducing the health toll from air pollution. The federal government is simply not serious about protecting the Great Lakes.
With respect to water in First Nations communities, the government says it "will undertake a comprehensive review of its current approach to financing First Nations infrastructure" in order to "support access by First Nations to alternative sources of financing, and approaches to improve the life-cycle management of capital assets". This raises the spectre of private-public partnerships and all-out privatization, rather than the public provision of water and the recognition of the human right to water.
And while taking no real action to protect or conserve water, the budget allocates $18.4 million over two years to the Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators initiative, which the government says "produces a coherent set of indicators on water quality, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions over time."
ENERGY
The Harper government states that "Canada has established itself as an energy superpower" and notes the "unprecedented opportunities" to export "energy products within an integrated North American energy market and to the rest of the world". It promotes Canada as an "increasingly attractive destination for global investment" to "tap our abundant energy potential".
It wants to support this by accelerating "regulatory reviews of major energy projects", like the environmentally-destructive projects in the tar sands. It says "responsibility for conducting environmental assessments for energy projects will be delegated from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for projects falling under their respective areas of expertise."
The government also says "the resource potential in Canada's North is world-class" but that "potential investors in northern resource projects face complex and overlapping regulatory processes". To remove these "unpredictable, costly and time-consuming" protections, they will spend $11 million over two years "to support the acceleration of the review of resource projects in the North". This undoubtedly is driven by the US Geological Survey reporting in July 2008 that the Arctic Circle has 90 billion barrels of ‘technically recoverable’ oil and 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
The Harper government also continues to support "the development of advanced clean energy solutions, such as carbon capture and storage technologies" that are environmentally problematic and have been promoted, despite evidence to the contrary, as a way to green the tar sands. Even an Alberta-Canada EcoEnergy Task Force report released in January 2008 says that only a small percentage of CO2 emitted from the tar sands is currently amenable to the technology because of the size and concentrations of the emission streams.
CBC.ca reports that, "The Council of Canadians said the Conservative government has let down people concerned with the state of the environment. Andrea Harden-Donahue, the council's national environmental campaigner, said there was barely a mention about the environment or creating green jobs. 'Really, it's surprising because this is the way the world is moving. Now, we need to review the budget and see what numbers are going where, but certainly from the speech itself, there's no indication that this is a priority for the government,' Harden-Donahue said."
This article is at
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2010/03/04/
ns-federal-budget-reaction.html.
There are many other problems with this budget - including the opening of the telecommunications sector to foreign ownership and the further cutting of already minimal corporate taxes (down to 15 percent by 2012) - that all indicate the Harper government is taking Canada in the wrong direction.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
=============================
8. Our choice of governments: Liars or Cowards by Murray Dobbin
http://murraydobbin.ca/2010/03/03/
our-choice-of-governments-liars-or-cowards/
Posted: 03 Mar 2010 05:36 PM PST
The throne speech should have been the most important political news of the last few days but, not surprisingly, the Harper government came up with almost nothing. To be sure, there were more hints about handing the economy over [to] the US – what passes for economic policy from a man enamored with unregulated US capitalism. More free trade, opening up telecom and other areas to foreign investment, pushing P3s (public private partnerships) and reinforcing his commitment to the next phases of corporate tax cuts. He will re-introduce his crime bills in their original form and now count on his plurality in the senate to get through un-amended.
But more important, as they are reminders of the depressing deadlock Canadian democracy finds itself in, were statements from Michael Ignatieff and Harper's right hand man, Jason Kenny. The first reminds us of why we never, ever want Ignatieff to have a majority government. The latter reminds us of how totally corrupt the current government is – a governnment of liars who use the political authority given to them to pursue their own personal agendas, the law and integrity be damned.
Ignatieff distinguished himself with a truly despicable diatribe about Israeli Apartheid Week – denouncing it as anti-Semitism and using the same offensive intimidation tactics used by B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress against any criticism of Israel.
MORE: http://murraydobbin.ca/2010/03/03/
our-choice-of-governments-liars-or-cowards/
=====================
9. ESSAY: 'Harper's assault on democracy' by Murray Dobbin – Part 1 of 10
http://rabble.ca/news/2010/03/harpers-assault-democracy
From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:33 AM
Rabble.ca columnist Murray Dobbin details the harm Prime Minister Stephen Harper is doing to the political and social fabric of Canada in a new essay commissioned by The Council of Canadians.
This article - http://rabble.ca/news/2010/03/harpers-assault-democracy - is an excerpt taken from the essay, the first in a 10-part series on Harper's assault on democracy.
Part two of Murray Dobbin's series is on the implications of the two prorogations of Parliament. It will be published tomorrow, March 4, to coincide with the federal budget and the reconvening of Parliament. The results are due out shortly of a major poll by Environics on proportional representation, made for The Council of Canadians.
Brent Patterson
The Council of Canadians
www.canadians.org/campaignblog
===========================
10. Annual General Meeting - May 8, 2010 - The Green Party of Saskatchewan’s (GPS)
More Details to Follow. Watch http://www.saskgreen.ca/
Take Action, Make Change, Run for the Party Executive!
We are now seeking nominations for the party executive. Members of the executive influence the direction of the party throughout the year. This is your chance to create change, to inspire political action, and make a difference. The executive is composed of six positions that are elected every year: Party Leader, Party President, Deputy Leader, Party Vice-President, Secretary, and Treasurer.
Nominations for Executive must be received by March 8, 2010, two months prior to the AGM.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
EXCERPT from GPS Policy:
Nuclear and uranium policy from the 2007 "Green Book":
http://www.saskgreen.ca/policy/nuclear_and_uranium
Nuclear and uranium spokesperson: Rob Cram (306-373-1587 / robcram@shaw.ca)
The Green Party of Saskatchewan is opposed to nuclear power for the following reasons:
Nuclear power is fiscally unsound. The last nuclear power plant in Canada came in seven times over budget, costing $14 billion dollars. This does not include the high cost involved in decommissioning old power plants.
Nuclear waste cannot be stored, treated, or disposed of safely.
A large amount of radioactive tailings accumulate as a result of uranium mining. These tailings can leak into groundwater and affect the surrounding area, leading to increased cancer rates.
Depleted uranium ends up in weapons such as missiles and anti-tank bullets.
Nuclear power is NOT emmisions free. Large quantities of greenhouse gases are produced in the mining and refining of uranium as well as during the long construction period of the power plant.
We will phase out uranium mining in Saskatchewan, compensating those affected during transition.
========================
11. Our Corrupt Nuclear Regulator - CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION (CNSC) – Pat McNamara
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1581#1581
We caught the CNSC with their pants down on their first trip into Alberta. The CNSC repeatedly refused our community’s requests to come and explain the regulatory process yet we’ve now confirmed they’ve met with First Nations friends up to 500 km. away. Why don’t the people living closest to the proposed reactor site have the same rights as First Nations?
The CNSC introduced itself to the Peace Country the same way the nuclear industry did; by holding secret meetings to get select groups onside before they spoke to the public. After weeks of denial by the CNSC and our MP Chris Warkentin, the truth came out on February 16. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) confirmed that the CNSC and the CEAA met with First Nations bands during the past two years.
The CNSC and the CEAA should be commended for consulting people living so far away, but they must also be held accountable for refusing to meet with the people who are, and will be most affected by the nuclear proposal. The CNSC doesn’t want to come to our community because 85% of us are opposed to the nuclear project and we’re very well-informed on nuclear issues. We’re not a “willing host community” but the CNSC doesn’t want to hear that.
We have no way of knowing how many secret meetings they’ve held as this is the first time they were caught doing it. However, the first evidence we have of the CNSC’s involvement was a Whitecourt Star article from July 17, 2007. Reporter Chandra Lye writes: “He (Wayne Henuset) added that they intended to make a decision by the end of September but that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has asked them to indicate a preferred location by the end of July”.
MORE:
http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/vie ... =1581#1581
Pat McNamara
Weberville Area Connection
entwork@hotmail.com
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Check out the CNSC website and look for various power point presentations by CNSC President Binder.
After Linda Keen was fired. he was appointed the President of the CNSC. He is openly and unabashedly the salesman and promoter for the nuclear industry. Can the CNSC really be trusted in protecting Canadians? Read on.....
CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION:
http://www.cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca/eng/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org
========================
12. A Homeland "Security Blanket" for the Defense Industry: The Flawed Nuke Detection Program By Tom Burghardt
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17849
Global Research, March 1, 2010Antifascist Calling... - 2010-02-28
Though production lines at the fear factory are still in overdrive, the Department of Homeland Security's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) are scrapping plans for a new generation of "high-tech detectors for screening vehicles and cargo, saying they cost too much and do not work as effectively as security officials once maintained," The Washington Post reported.
Nearly two years ago, Antifascist Calling revealed that when DNDO awarded contracts totaling some $1.2 billion over five years to defense and security giants Raytheon, Canberra Industries (a subsidiary of the French nuclear manufacturing titan, the Areva Group) and Thermo Scientific for Advanced Spectroscopic Portal (ASP) radiation monitors in 2006, it should have been "reality-check time."
For the moment at least, it apparently is.
As late as January 2010, despite revelations that the program widely missed the mark, DNDO officials claimed that the ASP "will enhance current detection capabilities by more clearly identifying the source of detected radiation through spectroscopic isotope identification."
Notwithstanding persistent flaws and cost overruns dogging the program, the Department of Homeland Security asked for $41M in its 2011 budget request "for the procurement and deployment of radiological and nuclear detection systems and equipment to support efforts across the Department."
Why would they do that? For answers, we'd better consult defense and security powerhouse Raytheon, the project's prime contractor.
A Homeland "Security Blanket" for the Defense Industry
Clocking-in at No. 5 on Washington Technology's 2009 "Top 100 List" of Federal Prime Contractors, the company pulled-down some $5,942,575,316 in defense and security-related contracts from the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, NASA, the armed forces and Department of Homeland Security.
According to Raytheon, "ASP detectors address the threat of radiological dispersal devices, improvised nuclear devices or a nuclear weapon being used by terrorists inside the United States," therefore "a more discriminating primary screening system--the ASP--is needed."
Touted as a next-gen "homeland security tool" that would provide Customs and Border Protection inspectors with the capability to detect illicit nuclear or radiological materials inside containers entering American ports, "with low false alarm rates" to boot, despite hundreds of millions of dollars poured into the program, the ASP performs no better than devices in place today.
As with existent monitors, the ASP was unable to distinguish between components required to manufacture a radiological dirty bomb from natural radiation emitters such as--wait!-- kitty litter, ceramics or bananas!
MORE: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17849
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS (2): March 6, 2010
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:36 am
NUKE NEWS (2): March 6, 2010
Compilation:
1. IS CANADA TURNING INTO A DICTATORSHIP? - Dr. David McGrane
2. Struggle continues over Nuclear Policy Review
3. Nuclear waste blue ribbon panel to start work
4. Nuclear projects face financial obstacles
5. New Nuclear – The Economics Say No - New Nuclear Development – Corporate Risks
6. Wind-turbine plan envisions switch to nuclear
7. Norwegian Company Develops World’s Largest Wind Turbine
8. World's top firms cause $2.2tn of environmental damage, report estimates
9. French nuclear tests in Algeria leave toxic legacy.
10. Aborigines discuss nuclear proposal on tribal land.
11. NEW: Sierra Club Canada (SCC) Trade and Environment website
12. “Save Greenpeace” Website Launched in Canada
========================
1. IS CANADA TURNING INTO A DICTATORSHIP? - Dr. David McGrane - John Thompson Lecture Series - March 11, 2010
Department of Political Studies, St. Thomas More College
3:30 pm, Thursday March 11, 2010, St Thomas More College Auditorium, U of S Campus
No Cost– Social to follow. Everyone is welcome.
Since the Governor General granted the prorogation of Parliament in late 2008 to avoid the formation of a coalition Liberal-NDP government, there has been much discussion concerning Stephen Harper’s alleged abuse of Prime Ministerial power. This lecture will describe two schools of thought on Canadian Prime Ministerial power in the 21st century: the ‘democratic deficit’ school and the ‘efficiency’ school. After examining these two schools of thought, the consequences of potential reforms to Canada’s parliamentary system will be explored.
----------------------------------------
Dr. David McGrane
Assistant Professor of Political Studies
University of Saskatchewan
Phone: 306-966-8924
=====================
2. Struggle continues over Nuclear Policy Review
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=4192&utm_sou ... email&utm_
campaign=Feed%3A+ceasefire%2FycPl+%28Ceasefire.ca%29
Tue, Mar 2, 2010 Nuclear weapons
The Obama administration continues to struggle to complete its review of U.S. nuclear weapons policy. The Nuclear Policy Review was originally scheduled for completion in December 2009, but disagreements within the administration between hardliners in the Pentagon and National Security Council and supporters of greater nuclear reductions, thought to include the President, have delayed completion of the document.
The Guardian reported on Sunday that Obama has ordered a draft of the policy document rewritten to more closely match his disarmament objectives (Peter Beaumont, “Barack Obama orders new nuclear review amid growing feud,” Guardian, 28 February 2010).
The New York Times has a somewhat different take on the story, however, reporting on Monday that a nearly complete version of the review, with options for resolving the remaining issues, would be presented to the President by Defense Secretary Robert Gates later that day (David E. Sanger & Thom Shanker, “White House is Rethinking Nuclear Policy,” New York Times, 1 March 2010).
The administration hopes to complete the review process this month or next.
Among the questions to be resolved in the review are the scale of reductions that the Obama administration will seek to implement and whether or not to make changes in the role ascribed to nuclear weapons, their level of alert, and the geographic deployment of the weapons. Quiet discussions are already underway with the NATO allies about possible changes to NATO nuclear policy, which could include an end to the NATO “nuclear-sharing” program and/or the withdrawal of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons from Europe.
Barack Obama, NATO, Nuclear Policy Review, Nuclear weapons, U.S. nuclear
=======================
3. Nuclear waste blue ribbon panel to start work
http://www.lvrj.com/
news/nuclear-waste-blue-ribbon-panel-to-start-work-86253967.html
Mar. 03, 2010 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The federal commission charged with exploring alternatives to storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain will begin its work later this month, the Department of Energy said Wednesday.
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future will meet on March 25 and 26 in Washington.
It will be the first public gathering of the 15 science and policy experts who have been asked to review the U.S. strategy for managing used nuclear fuel from power plants and other forms of highly radioactive materials.
The announcement came on the day when Nevada officials and others were awaiting the Department of Energy making its move to take another big step away from Yucca Mountain as the preferred destination for more than 77,000 tons of nuclear waste stored around the country.
DOE was facing a 30-day deadline to file a motion with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to withdraw its license application to build an underground repository at the Nevada site.
"We welcome today's motion by DOE and will be supporting it," said Bruce Breslow, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects.
But Breslow added it could be "some time" before the NRC rules on the DOE motion. The states of Washington and South Carolina have come out in opposition, and have filed requests to intervene in the case.
MORE:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/
nuclear-waste-blue-ribbon-panel-to-start-work-86253967.html
===========================
4. Nuclear projects face financial obstacles
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03975.html
By Steven Mufson, Washington Post, Tuesday, March 2, 2010; page A01
Hopes for a nuclear revival, fanned by fears of global warming and a changing political climate in Washington, are running into new obstacles over a key element -- money.
A new approach for easing the cost of new multibillion-dollar reactors, which can take years to complete, has provoked a backlash from big-business customers unwilling to go along.
Financing has always been one of the biggest obstacles to a renaissance of nuclear power. The plants are expensive, and construction tends to run late and over budget. The projected cost for a pair of proposed Georgia plants would be $14 billion; the Obama administration last month pledged to provide them with $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees.
So utilities have turned to state legislators and regulators to help contain capital costs. In states such as Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, utilities have won permission to charge customers for some of the cost of new reactors while construction is still in
progress -- a financing technique that would save utilities a couple of billion dollars for each reactor. Previously, utilities had to wait until power plants were in operation before raising rates, as they still do in most states.
"We tell people it's like paying off the interest on your credit card as you go along, rather than letting it compound," said Suzanne Grant, a spokeswoman for Progress Energy.
But businesses and other electricity users in those states aren't buying that argument. Instead, they are saying utilities are pawning off much of the projects' liabilities on customers because bank lenders and investors will not take the risks.
"It's a terrible idea," said Jim Clarkson, a consultant with Resource Supply Management, a Georgia firm that advises companies on how to reduce electricity use. "We've had decades of subsidies for nuclear plants and all sorts of preferential treatment. They
still require loan guarantees because the smart money won't touch them."
"Nuclear power is very important," says John W. McWhirter, who represents the Florida Industrial Power Users Group. "We just wish consumers could be protected."
The reaction of big businesses, as well as other consumers, has turned states that were bastions of support for nuclear power into hazardous territory. And it could thwart the Obama administration's efforts to jump-start nuclear reactor construction by handing out chunks of the $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees Congress authorized in 2005.
MORE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03975.html
==========================
5. New Nuclear – The Economics Say No - New Nuclear Development – Corporate Risks
https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU27102.pdf
Citigroup Global Markets, 9 November 2009
The Five Risks
There are five substantial areas of risk faced by developers of new nuclear power stations. Three of those risk areas are so big and significant that if they go wrong, the developer (even the biggest utilities) could be financiallydamaged beyond repair. These risks can be classed as Corporate Killers.
The [U.K.] government today announced measures to limit Planning risk, which while important in encouraging developers to bring forward projects, is actually the least significant risk financially. The government is still asking the utility companies to take on the three major risks — Construction, Power Price, and Operational. Indeed, at no time, anywhere in the world, has a utility built a new nuclear power station and taken the full Construction, Power Price, and Operational Risk.
The five risk areas are:
1. Planning:
Nuclear power remains controversial and opposition to new developments often results in extended planning procedures. In a lot of countries, planning can take five years or more. The UK government’s action today is designed to limit this time frame, reducing the risk faced by developers.
MORE: https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU27102.pdf
==========================
6. Wind-turbine plan envisions switch to nuclear
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/
Wind+turbine+plan+envisions+switch+nuclear/2574159/story.html
By Dave Cooper Edmonton Journal February 17, 2010
Tiny nuclear reactors originally designed to power mini-submarines could eventually replace wind power in a local firm's plans for storing energy as compressed gas in pipelines across North America.
Dave McConnell, president and CEO of Nisku-based Lancaster Wind Systems, said Tuesday the additional details of his project can now be discussed after provisional patent protection was gained in the US late last week.
McConnell said he already has a patented wind turbine that will be going into further trials this summer in southern Alberta.
Instead of generating electricity from a turning propeller shaft, like all other turbines on the market, Lancaster's version resembles a hydraulic pump much like a windmill. A closed system circulates fluid up and down the mast, with the energy being used at the base to compress nitrogen gas in a large cylinder as a means of storage.
But the heart of Lancaster's scheme, which the firm says has attracted millions of dollars from private investors in Canada and the United States, is energy storage with compressed gas, making wind power a constant source of energy instead of one totally dependent on variable winds.
As it is released, the nitrogen turns an electrical generator inside a closed system, which then returns to the pipeline.
McConnell said because of the huge size of the proposed system, which would use existing pipeline routes through Alberta and the US, pressure can be added anywhere and removed from any point.
And by using just seven mini-reactors, each with a rated power of three megawatts running compression units spaced every 1,200 kilometres, pressure in the system can be maintained.
"We had always planned to use the micro-reactors in phase two sometime after 2015. But we just got conditional patent approval late last week for our compression technology, so now we can talk about it a bit," McConnell said.
Canadian nuclear builder CANDU is bidding to supply the micro-reactors, which weigh 42 tonnes and are the size of a car. The cost of installing such a unit is estimated to be about $50 million, he said.
One reactor would be in the Chain Lakes-Pincher Creek area, with a second between Montana and Idaho and another one in Arizona. The compressed-nitrogen pipeline could extend through the US Midwest and south to the Gulf Coast.
Bill Kennedy, an engineering consultant to Lancaster and former head of the Alberta Electrical System Operator which manages power in the province, said McConnell's idea is clever.
"The energy in the compressed gas can come on as the grid builds to its daily peaks -- breakfast and dinner times. And the closed nitrogen gas system is analogous to coal or gas-fired plants," he said.
"You release the steam through the turbine, and end up with hot water, which is reintroduced into the system, so you aren't losing the energy in the hot water and you don't have to start with cold water."
In the end, that means the compressed-gas system will act more like a base load generator such as a coal-fired generator, which runs constantly with an even output.
But with wind farms sprouting up all over North America at a rapid rate, Kennedy doesn't expect they'll be replaced by nuclear-powered gas compression.
McConnell disagreed.
"I think wind turbines will be a dinosaur in 25 years."
MORE:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/
Wind+turbine+plan+envisions+switch+nuclear/2574159/story.html
=========================
7. Norwegian Company Develops World’s Largest Wind Turbine
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info ... d-turbine/
Renewable Energy News, March 1st, 2010
As fossil fuels continue to diminish and climate change poses an ever-increasing threat, scientists around the world are searching for new and more efficient methods of generating energy.
Wind energy is one of the more promising alternative energy sources and Norwegian scientists are currently in the development stages of what promises to be the world’s largest wind turbine. As if creating the biggest wind turbine in the world was not enough, it also floats.
Current plans for the world’s largest wind turbine have the machine standing 533 feet tall.
The proposed rotor diameter of this machine is 475 feet. Obviously, these gargantuan dimensions make it difficult to imagine many places able to accommodate such a device. Fortunately, the floating design makes the turbine suitable for open ocean use.
In addition to being the world’s largest wind turbine, the proposed machine (which is to be built by the Norwegian company Sway), will also be the most powerful. A single floating turbine will be able to generate 10-megawatts to power more than 2,000 homes. These figures make this proposed new design at least three times more powerful than the existing wind turbines in use today.
MORE:
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info ... d-turbine/
===========================
8. World's top firms cause $2.2tn of environmental damage, report estimates
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/18/
worlds-top-firms-environmental-damage
Report for the UN into the activities of the world's 3,000 biggest companies estimates one-third of profits would be lost if firms were forced to pay for use, loss and damage of environment
Juliette Jowit February 18, 2010
The cost of pollution and other damage to the natural environment caused by the world's biggest companies would wipe out more than one-third of their profits if they were held financially accountable, a major unpublished study for the United Nations has found.
The report comes amid growing concern that no one is made to pay for most of the use, loss and damage of the environment, which is reaching crisis proportions in the form of pollution and the rapid loss of freshwater, fisheries and fertile soils.
Later this year, another huge UN study - dubbed the "Stern for nature" after the influential report on the economics of climate change by Sir Nicholas Stern - will attempt to put a price on such global environmental damage, and suggest ways to prevent it. The report, led by economist Pavan Sukhdev, is likely to argue for abolition of billions of dollars of subsidies to harmful industries like agriculture, energy and transport, tougher regulations and more taxes on companies that cause the damage.
MORE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/18/
worlds-top-firms-environmental-damage
=========================
9. French nuclear tests in Algeria leave toxic legacy.
Radioactive material is seeping out from this Sahara desert mountain where French scientists conducted nuclear tests in the 1960s, contaminating the soil and poisoning relations between France and Algeria. Reuters
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/CHI233933.htm
==========================
10. Aborigines discuss nuclear proposal on tribal land.
Aboriginal groups have held a public meeting to debate controversial plans to build Australia's first nuclear waste dump on tribal land. BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8546690.stm
======================
11. NEW: Sierra Club Canada (SCC) Trade and Environment website
From: "Janet M Eaton" <jmeaton@ns.sympatico.ca>
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 1:55 PM
Here is the link for the new "Trade and Environment Campaign" pages on the Sierra Club Canada Website: http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/trade-environment
I'll be posting news and blogging regularly every other day or so.
Janet Eaton, Trade & Environment Campaigner
Sierra Club Canada
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Trade and Environment Campaign: A Better Balance is Possible between Trade & Environment
Sierra Club Canada's Trade and Environment Campaign is centred on the mounting evidence that unfettered economic globalization and its agenda of free trade, de-regulation, and privatization implemented over the past two decades without public consultation, has had a devastating impact on our immediate environment, the ecosystems of the planet and broader planetary cycles that are now deeply out of
balance from pollution, depletion of resources and excessive CO2 and other emissions.
The Trade and Environment Campaign focuses on: (i) the cascade of bi-lateral and internal FTAs being pushed through without adequate consultation or impact studies (ii) the imperative of re-negotiating NAFTA, and all free trade agreements, iii) working to rid all trade agreements of the unjust, undemocratic and unsustainable NAFTA Ch 11
investor state mechanism, (iv) pushing for legislated provincial citizen´s trade commissions as oversight bodies to assess impacts of trade agreements on provincial and municipal sovereignty (v) working towards fairer trade models and sustainable economic systems.
The Trade and Environment Campaign works to increase awareness of how globalization, free trade and NAFTA impact the environment and ecosystems; mounts campaigns with the membership, and in association with other national NGO´s and coalitions to oppose trade agreements that are harmful to the environment, local economies, workers, and sovereignty; and works toward alternatives to corporate economic globalization using eco-systemic thinking to revision and reframe inadequate policies shaped by an industrial mechanistic lens resulting in economic policies that considered the environment an externality and unending growth an inevitability.
Janet Eaton [Bio ]
Janet's diverse experience as a biologist, community and adult educator, as a well-known critic of globalization and free trade, and as a part time academic who has taught courses on globalization; community political power; and environment and sustainable society,
provides a comprehensive background for her new role as volunteer trade and environment campaigner for Sierra Club Canada. She has also been a volunteer with SCC for ten years as a founding member of Sierra Club Canada Atlantic Chapter, working as an international liaison for SCC on Water Privatization and Corporate accountability
issues, and working in the Atlantic region on free trade issues where she represents SCC on the Nova Scotia Trading Options coalition.
Nationally she is SCC rep on Common Frontiers a forum for national groups that work throughout the Americas on free trade and economic alternatives and she represents SCC on the Steering Committee of a new coalition of multiple national groups that have recently come together to expose concerns with CETA, the Canada -EU Comprehensive
Economic and Trade Agreement which threatens to pry open public procurement and public services at the provincial and municipal levels and further weaken environmental legislation. She looks forward to working with Club members on campaigns related to free trade, globalization and economic alternatives that will move us toward more sustainable communities, a more sustainable Canada and a more stable planetary system. Janet has a BSc in Biology from Acadia University and a PhD in Marine Biology from Dalhousie University, Halifax. She attributes her background in Biology, and her later
involvement with the International Systems Institute as major influences in the development of her systemic worldview which helps her to better envision possibilities for whole system change.
===========================
12. “Save Greenpeace” Website Launched in Canada
http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/2010/03/
for-immediate-release-save-greenpeacewebsite-launched-in-canada/
For immediate release---March 5, 2010
Hiring Tzeporah Berman jeopardizes 39 year legacy of environmental activism
VANCOUVER, March 4--Since Greenpeace International announced its hiring of ForestEthics founder and current Power Up Canada director Tzeporah Berman as co-director of its climate campaign, a chorus of long-time environmental activists have voiced their strong opposition.
Today, activists launched a new website they hope will amplify these voices and help convince Greenpeace to change direction: www.SaveGreenpeace.org
Greenpeace International co-founder Rex Weyler (not affiliated with www.savegreenpeace.org) called the decision to hire Berman "an all-out betrayal of environmentalism, of the groups and activists who built the environmental movement in Canada and in the world, and a betrayal of the Earth itself."
"Tzeporah now speaks for General Electric, not for the Earth, not for wilderness, and not for our children’s future," he added in an email making the rounds in environmental circles.
Since 1980, environmental groups have increasingly partnered with the corporations involved in environmentally damaging activities, trading mild reforms for their seal of approval. Yesterday, a former employee of Conservation International told The Nation that "Not only do the largest conservation groups take money from companies deeply implicated in environmental crimes; they have become something like satellite PR offices for the corporations that support them." [1]
Tzeporah Berman has been a pioneer of the collaborative approach. As founder of ForestEthics, she drew the ire of BC environmentalists and natives for eliminating public oversight from negotiations around the Great Bear Rainforest, giving the go-ahead to a plan to log 70% of the pristine forest. She has most recently been a vocal supporter of Gordon Campbell's Liberal government while advocating for the privatization and damming of BC's rivers as director of Power Up Canada.
Greenpeace was founded in Vancouver in 1971. It has its roots in a frustration with the Sierra Club's--a dominant environmental group at the time--inaction in response to nuclear testing. Sierra Club brass did not like the direct action tactics of Greenpeace's founders, and a new kind of environmental organization was born. In 39 years, Greenpeace has conducted hundreds of direct actions confronting destructive corporate practices. The approach resonated: Greenpeace's membership is 2.8 million strong as of 2008.
"Greenpeace's original approach was confronting corporations and governments at the scenes of their crimes," said savegreenpeace.org co-creator Macdonald Stainsby. "That approach has softened lately, but if they hire Tzeporah Berman, they'll be on the fast track to corporate collaboration, beyond the point of no return."
"There is a massive struggle going on inside Greenpeace," he added, "but people who are employees can't talk about it, so it's up to the rest of us to oppose this vocally."
SaveGreenpeace.org invites visitors to sign on to a statement opposing collaboration with corporations, asking the venerable direct action organization to reverse course and not hire Tzeporah Berman.
Contact:
Macdonald Stainsby
780 233 4992
mstainsby@resist.ca
[1] http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100322/hari
Compilation:
1. IS CANADA TURNING INTO A DICTATORSHIP? - Dr. David McGrane
2. Struggle continues over Nuclear Policy Review
3. Nuclear waste blue ribbon panel to start work
4. Nuclear projects face financial obstacles
5. New Nuclear – The Economics Say No - New Nuclear Development – Corporate Risks
6. Wind-turbine plan envisions switch to nuclear
7. Norwegian Company Develops World’s Largest Wind Turbine
8. World's top firms cause $2.2tn of environmental damage, report estimates
9. French nuclear tests in Algeria leave toxic legacy.
10. Aborigines discuss nuclear proposal on tribal land.
11. NEW: Sierra Club Canada (SCC) Trade and Environment website
12. “Save Greenpeace” Website Launched in Canada
========================
1. IS CANADA TURNING INTO A DICTATORSHIP? - Dr. David McGrane - John Thompson Lecture Series - March 11, 2010
Department of Political Studies, St. Thomas More College
3:30 pm, Thursday March 11, 2010, St Thomas More College Auditorium, U of S Campus
No Cost– Social to follow. Everyone is welcome.
Since the Governor General granted the prorogation of Parliament in late 2008 to avoid the formation of a coalition Liberal-NDP government, there has been much discussion concerning Stephen Harper’s alleged abuse of Prime Ministerial power. This lecture will describe two schools of thought on Canadian Prime Ministerial power in the 21st century: the ‘democratic deficit’ school and the ‘efficiency’ school. After examining these two schools of thought, the consequences of potential reforms to Canada’s parliamentary system will be explored.
----------------------------------------
Dr. David McGrane
Assistant Professor of Political Studies
University of Saskatchewan
Phone: 306-966-8924
=====================
2. Struggle continues over Nuclear Policy Review
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=4192&utm_sou ... email&utm_
campaign=Feed%3A+ceasefire%2FycPl+%28Ceasefire.ca%29
Tue, Mar 2, 2010 Nuclear weapons
The Obama administration continues to struggle to complete its review of U.S. nuclear weapons policy. The Nuclear Policy Review was originally scheduled for completion in December 2009, but disagreements within the administration between hardliners in the Pentagon and National Security Council and supporters of greater nuclear reductions, thought to include the President, have delayed completion of the document.
The Guardian reported on Sunday that Obama has ordered a draft of the policy document rewritten to more closely match his disarmament objectives (Peter Beaumont, “Barack Obama orders new nuclear review amid growing feud,” Guardian, 28 February 2010).
The New York Times has a somewhat different take on the story, however, reporting on Monday that a nearly complete version of the review, with options for resolving the remaining issues, would be presented to the President by Defense Secretary Robert Gates later that day (David E. Sanger & Thom Shanker, “White House is Rethinking Nuclear Policy,” New York Times, 1 March 2010).
The administration hopes to complete the review process this month or next.
Among the questions to be resolved in the review are the scale of reductions that the Obama administration will seek to implement and whether or not to make changes in the role ascribed to nuclear weapons, their level of alert, and the geographic deployment of the weapons. Quiet discussions are already underway with the NATO allies about possible changes to NATO nuclear policy, which could include an end to the NATO “nuclear-sharing” program and/or the withdrawal of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons from Europe.
Barack Obama, NATO, Nuclear Policy Review, Nuclear weapons, U.S. nuclear
=======================
3. Nuclear waste blue ribbon panel to start work
http://www.lvrj.com/
news/nuclear-waste-blue-ribbon-panel-to-start-work-86253967.html
Mar. 03, 2010 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The federal commission charged with exploring alternatives to storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain will begin its work later this month, the Department of Energy said Wednesday.
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future will meet on March 25 and 26 in Washington.
It will be the first public gathering of the 15 science and policy experts who have been asked to review the U.S. strategy for managing used nuclear fuel from power plants and other forms of highly radioactive materials.
The announcement came on the day when Nevada officials and others were awaiting the Department of Energy making its move to take another big step away from Yucca Mountain as the preferred destination for more than 77,000 tons of nuclear waste stored around the country.
DOE was facing a 30-day deadline to file a motion with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to withdraw its license application to build an underground repository at the Nevada site.
"We welcome today's motion by DOE and will be supporting it," said Bruce Breslow, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects.
But Breslow added it could be "some time" before the NRC rules on the DOE motion. The states of Washington and South Carolina have come out in opposition, and have filed requests to intervene in the case.
MORE:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/
nuclear-waste-blue-ribbon-panel-to-start-work-86253967.html
===========================
4. Nuclear projects face financial obstacles
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03975.html
By Steven Mufson, Washington Post, Tuesday, March 2, 2010; page A01
Hopes for a nuclear revival, fanned by fears of global warming and a changing political climate in Washington, are running into new obstacles over a key element -- money.
A new approach for easing the cost of new multibillion-dollar reactors, which can take years to complete, has provoked a backlash from big-business customers unwilling to go along.
Financing has always been one of the biggest obstacles to a renaissance of nuclear power. The plants are expensive, and construction tends to run late and over budget. The projected cost for a pair of proposed Georgia plants would be $14 billion; the Obama administration last month pledged to provide them with $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees.
So utilities have turned to state legislators and regulators to help contain capital costs. In states such as Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, utilities have won permission to charge customers for some of the cost of new reactors while construction is still in
progress -- a financing technique that would save utilities a couple of billion dollars for each reactor. Previously, utilities had to wait until power plants were in operation before raising rates, as they still do in most states.
"We tell people it's like paying off the interest on your credit card as you go along, rather than letting it compound," said Suzanne Grant, a spokeswoman for Progress Energy.
But businesses and other electricity users in those states aren't buying that argument. Instead, they are saying utilities are pawning off much of the projects' liabilities on customers because bank lenders and investors will not take the risks.
"It's a terrible idea," said Jim Clarkson, a consultant with Resource Supply Management, a Georgia firm that advises companies on how to reduce electricity use. "We've had decades of subsidies for nuclear plants and all sorts of preferential treatment. They
still require loan guarantees because the smart money won't touch them."
"Nuclear power is very important," says John W. McWhirter, who represents the Florida Industrial Power Users Group. "We just wish consumers could be protected."
The reaction of big businesses, as well as other consumers, has turned states that were bastions of support for nuclear power into hazardous territory. And it could thwart the Obama administration's efforts to jump-start nuclear reactor construction by handing out chunks of the $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees Congress authorized in 2005.
MORE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03975.html
==========================
5. New Nuclear – The Economics Say No - New Nuclear Development – Corporate Risks
https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU27102.pdf
Citigroup Global Markets, 9 November 2009
The Five Risks
There are five substantial areas of risk faced by developers of new nuclear power stations. Three of those risk areas are so big and significant that if they go wrong, the developer (even the biggest utilities) could be financiallydamaged beyond repair. These risks can be classed as Corporate Killers.
The [U.K.] government today announced measures to limit Planning risk, which while important in encouraging developers to bring forward projects, is actually the least significant risk financially. The government is still asking the utility companies to take on the three major risks — Construction, Power Price, and Operational. Indeed, at no time, anywhere in the world, has a utility built a new nuclear power station and taken the full Construction, Power Price, and Operational Risk.
The five risk areas are:
1. Planning:
Nuclear power remains controversial and opposition to new developments often results in extended planning procedures. In a lot of countries, planning can take five years or more. The UK government’s action today is designed to limit this time frame, reducing the risk faced by developers.
MORE: https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU27102.pdf
==========================
6. Wind-turbine plan envisions switch to nuclear
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/
Wind+turbine+plan+envisions+switch+nuclear/2574159/story.html
By Dave Cooper Edmonton Journal February 17, 2010
Tiny nuclear reactors originally designed to power mini-submarines could eventually replace wind power in a local firm's plans for storing energy as compressed gas in pipelines across North America.
Dave McConnell, president and CEO of Nisku-based Lancaster Wind Systems, said Tuesday the additional details of his project can now be discussed after provisional patent protection was gained in the US late last week.
McConnell said he already has a patented wind turbine that will be going into further trials this summer in southern Alberta.
Instead of generating electricity from a turning propeller shaft, like all other turbines on the market, Lancaster's version resembles a hydraulic pump much like a windmill. A closed system circulates fluid up and down the mast, with the energy being used at the base to compress nitrogen gas in a large cylinder as a means of storage.
But the heart of Lancaster's scheme, which the firm says has attracted millions of dollars from private investors in Canada and the United States, is energy storage with compressed gas, making wind power a constant source of energy instead of one totally dependent on variable winds.
As it is released, the nitrogen turns an electrical generator inside a closed system, which then returns to the pipeline.
McConnell said because of the huge size of the proposed system, which would use existing pipeline routes through Alberta and the US, pressure can be added anywhere and removed from any point.
And by using just seven mini-reactors, each with a rated power of three megawatts running compression units spaced every 1,200 kilometres, pressure in the system can be maintained.
"We had always planned to use the micro-reactors in phase two sometime after 2015. But we just got conditional patent approval late last week for our compression technology, so now we can talk about it a bit," McConnell said.
Canadian nuclear builder CANDU is bidding to supply the micro-reactors, which weigh 42 tonnes and are the size of a car. The cost of installing such a unit is estimated to be about $50 million, he said.
One reactor would be in the Chain Lakes-Pincher Creek area, with a second between Montana and Idaho and another one in Arizona. The compressed-nitrogen pipeline could extend through the US Midwest and south to the Gulf Coast.
Bill Kennedy, an engineering consultant to Lancaster and former head of the Alberta Electrical System Operator which manages power in the province, said McConnell's idea is clever.
"The energy in the compressed gas can come on as the grid builds to its daily peaks -- breakfast and dinner times. And the closed nitrogen gas system is analogous to coal or gas-fired plants," he said.
"You release the steam through the turbine, and end up with hot water, which is reintroduced into the system, so you aren't losing the energy in the hot water and you don't have to start with cold water."
In the end, that means the compressed-gas system will act more like a base load generator such as a coal-fired generator, which runs constantly with an even output.
But with wind farms sprouting up all over North America at a rapid rate, Kennedy doesn't expect they'll be replaced by nuclear-powered gas compression.
McConnell disagreed.
"I think wind turbines will be a dinosaur in 25 years."
MORE:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/
Wind+turbine+plan+envisions+switch+nuclear/2574159/story.html
=========================
7. Norwegian Company Develops World’s Largest Wind Turbine
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info ... d-turbine/
Renewable Energy News, March 1st, 2010
As fossil fuels continue to diminish and climate change poses an ever-increasing threat, scientists around the world are searching for new and more efficient methods of generating energy.
Wind energy is one of the more promising alternative energy sources and Norwegian scientists are currently in the development stages of what promises to be the world’s largest wind turbine. As if creating the biggest wind turbine in the world was not enough, it also floats.
Current plans for the world’s largest wind turbine have the machine standing 533 feet tall.
The proposed rotor diameter of this machine is 475 feet. Obviously, these gargantuan dimensions make it difficult to imagine many places able to accommodate such a device. Fortunately, the floating design makes the turbine suitable for open ocean use.
In addition to being the world’s largest wind turbine, the proposed machine (which is to be built by the Norwegian company Sway), will also be the most powerful. A single floating turbine will be able to generate 10-megawatts to power more than 2,000 homes. These figures make this proposed new design at least three times more powerful than the existing wind turbines in use today.
MORE:
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info ... d-turbine/
===========================
8. World's top firms cause $2.2tn of environmental damage, report estimates
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/18/
worlds-top-firms-environmental-damage
Report for the UN into the activities of the world's 3,000 biggest companies estimates one-third of profits would be lost if firms were forced to pay for use, loss and damage of environment
Juliette Jowit February 18, 2010
The cost of pollution and other damage to the natural environment caused by the world's biggest companies would wipe out more than one-third of their profits if they were held financially accountable, a major unpublished study for the United Nations has found.
The report comes amid growing concern that no one is made to pay for most of the use, loss and damage of the environment, which is reaching crisis proportions in the form of pollution and the rapid loss of freshwater, fisheries and fertile soils.
Later this year, another huge UN study - dubbed the "Stern for nature" after the influential report on the economics of climate change by Sir Nicholas Stern - will attempt to put a price on such global environmental damage, and suggest ways to prevent it. The report, led by economist Pavan Sukhdev, is likely to argue for abolition of billions of dollars of subsidies to harmful industries like agriculture, energy and transport, tougher regulations and more taxes on companies that cause the damage.
MORE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/18/
worlds-top-firms-environmental-damage
=========================
9. French nuclear tests in Algeria leave toxic legacy.
Radioactive material is seeping out from this Sahara desert mountain where French scientists conducted nuclear tests in the 1960s, contaminating the soil and poisoning relations between France and Algeria. Reuters
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/CHI233933.htm
==========================
10. Aborigines discuss nuclear proposal on tribal land.
Aboriginal groups have held a public meeting to debate controversial plans to build Australia's first nuclear waste dump on tribal land. BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8546690.stm
======================
11. NEW: Sierra Club Canada (SCC) Trade and Environment website
From: "Janet M Eaton" <jmeaton@ns.sympatico.ca>
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 1:55 PM
Here is the link for the new "Trade and Environment Campaign" pages on the Sierra Club Canada Website: http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/trade-environment
I'll be posting news and blogging regularly every other day or so.
Janet Eaton, Trade & Environment Campaigner
Sierra Club Canada
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Trade and Environment Campaign: A Better Balance is Possible between Trade & Environment
Sierra Club Canada's Trade and Environment Campaign is centred on the mounting evidence that unfettered economic globalization and its agenda of free trade, de-regulation, and privatization implemented over the past two decades without public consultation, has had a devastating impact on our immediate environment, the ecosystems of the planet and broader planetary cycles that are now deeply out of
balance from pollution, depletion of resources and excessive CO2 and other emissions.
The Trade and Environment Campaign focuses on: (i) the cascade of bi-lateral and internal FTAs being pushed through without adequate consultation or impact studies (ii) the imperative of re-negotiating NAFTA, and all free trade agreements, iii) working to rid all trade agreements of the unjust, undemocratic and unsustainable NAFTA Ch 11
investor state mechanism, (iv) pushing for legislated provincial citizen´s trade commissions as oversight bodies to assess impacts of trade agreements on provincial and municipal sovereignty (v) working towards fairer trade models and sustainable economic systems.
The Trade and Environment Campaign works to increase awareness of how globalization, free trade and NAFTA impact the environment and ecosystems; mounts campaigns with the membership, and in association with other national NGO´s and coalitions to oppose trade agreements that are harmful to the environment, local economies, workers, and sovereignty; and works toward alternatives to corporate economic globalization using eco-systemic thinking to revision and reframe inadequate policies shaped by an industrial mechanistic lens resulting in economic policies that considered the environment an externality and unending growth an inevitability.
Janet Eaton [Bio ]
Janet's diverse experience as a biologist, community and adult educator, as a well-known critic of globalization and free trade, and as a part time academic who has taught courses on globalization; community political power; and environment and sustainable society,
provides a comprehensive background for her new role as volunteer trade and environment campaigner for Sierra Club Canada. She has also been a volunteer with SCC for ten years as a founding member of Sierra Club Canada Atlantic Chapter, working as an international liaison for SCC on Water Privatization and Corporate accountability
issues, and working in the Atlantic region on free trade issues where she represents SCC on the Nova Scotia Trading Options coalition.
Nationally she is SCC rep on Common Frontiers a forum for national groups that work throughout the Americas on free trade and economic alternatives and she represents SCC on the Steering Committee of a new coalition of multiple national groups that have recently come together to expose concerns with CETA, the Canada -EU Comprehensive
Economic and Trade Agreement which threatens to pry open public procurement and public services at the provincial and municipal levels and further weaken environmental legislation. She looks forward to working with Club members on campaigns related to free trade, globalization and economic alternatives that will move us toward more sustainable communities, a more sustainable Canada and a more stable planetary system. Janet has a BSc in Biology from Acadia University and a PhD in Marine Biology from Dalhousie University, Halifax. She attributes her background in Biology, and her later
involvement with the International Systems Institute as major influences in the development of her systemic worldview which helps her to better envision possibilities for whole system change.
===========================
12. “Save Greenpeace” Website Launched in Canada
http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/2010/03/
for-immediate-release-save-greenpeacewebsite-launched-in-canada/
For immediate release---March 5, 2010
Hiring Tzeporah Berman jeopardizes 39 year legacy of environmental activism
VANCOUVER, March 4--Since Greenpeace International announced its hiring of ForestEthics founder and current Power Up Canada director Tzeporah Berman as co-director of its climate campaign, a chorus of long-time environmental activists have voiced their strong opposition.
Today, activists launched a new website they hope will amplify these voices and help convince Greenpeace to change direction: www.SaveGreenpeace.org
Greenpeace International co-founder Rex Weyler (not affiliated with www.savegreenpeace.org) called the decision to hire Berman "an all-out betrayal of environmentalism, of the groups and activists who built the environmental movement in Canada and in the world, and a betrayal of the Earth itself."
"Tzeporah now speaks for General Electric, not for the Earth, not for wilderness, and not for our children’s future," he added in an email making the rounds in environmental circles.
Since 1980, environmental groups have increasingly partnered with the corporations involved in environmentally damaging activities, trading mild reforms for their seal of approval. Yesterday, a former employee of Conservation International told The Nation that "Not only do the largest conservation groups take money from companies deeply implicated in environmental crimes; they have become something like satellite PR offices for the corporations that support them." [1]
Tzeporah Berman has been a pioneer of the collaborative approach. As founder of ForestEthics, she drew the ire of BC environmentalists and natives for eliminating public oversight from negotiations around the Great Bear Rainforest, giving the go-ahead to a plan to log 70% of the pristine forest. She has most recently been a vocal supporter of Gordon Campbell's Liberal government while advocating for the privatization and damming of BC's rivers as director of Power Up Canada.
Greenpeace was founded in Vancouver in 1971. It has its roots in a frustration with the Sierra Club's--a dominant environmental group at the time--inaction in response to nuclear testing. Sierra Club brass did not like the direct action tactics of Greenpeace's founders, and a new kind of environmental organization was born. In 39 years, Greenpeace has conducted hundreds of direct actions confronting destructive corporate practices. The approach resonated: Greenpeace's membership is 2.8 million strong as of 2008.
"Greenpeace's original approach was confronting corporations and governments at the scenes of their crimes," said savegreenpeace.org co-creator Macdonald Stainsby. "That approach has softened lately, but if they hire Tzeporah Berman, they'll be on the fast track to corporate collaboration, beyond the point of no return."
"There is a massive struggle going on inside Greenpeace," he added, "but people who are employees can't talk about it, so it's up to the rest of us to oppose this vocally."
SaveGreenpeace.org invites visitors to sign on to a statement opposing collaboration with corporations, asking the venerable direct action organization to reverse course and not hire Tzeporah Berman.
Contact:
Macdonald Stainsby
780 233 4992
mstainsby@resist.ca
[1] http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100322/hari
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS (1): March 7, 2010
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:37 am
NUKE NEWS (1): March 7, 2010
Compilation:
1. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) SK 2010 Federal Budget Reaction
2. Mildly radioactive parts to move through city port/Studsvik
3. Flaws must be fixed before nuclear revival
4. Ottawa to relax uranium rules
5. Funds for legacy waste facility
6. No Nukes News - Mar. 5, 2010
7. Comment – Rempel: uranium pollution in war and peace, plus the risk of nuclear war
8. Nuclear Waste Pools in North Carolina
9. Uranium in the Grand Canyon: 1 Million Acres that Could Help Fuel a U.S. Nuclear Energy Revival
10. End of the line for Yucca Mountain
11. Americans wary of nuclear waste, safety issues
12. UK faces struggle to find site for £12bn nuclear waste storage
=======================
1. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) SK 2010 Federal Budget Reaction
From: "- Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives" <ccpa.sask@sasktel.net>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 10:32 AM
Hi all,
Some comments from myself, Dave Winter of the Canadian Labour Congress and PSAC on yesterday's federal budget.
http://www.leaderpost.com/business/
Regina+business+leaders+applaud+federal+budget+public+
sector+freeze+unions+call+attack/2642867/story.html
Sincerely,
Simon Enoch, PhD, Director
Saskatchewan Office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA)
Suite G–2835, 13th Avenue, Regina, Sk. S4T 1N6
Office Phone:(306) 924-3372
E-mail: ccpasask@sasktel.net
- - - - -
Are you a member? The best way to ensure progressive research continues to be published in Saskatchwan is by joining the CCPA. To find out how you can support the CCPA call our office - Join Today!
=============================
2. Mildly radioactive parts to move through city port
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/Articl ... ?e=2463520
Bruce steam generators to be recycled
By ROB GOWAN, Owen Sound Sun Times Staff, TROY PATTERSON, QMI Agency February 24 2010
Sixteen 100-tonne, school-bus size steam generators, considered nuclear waste, are to go through Owen Sound en route to Sweden for recycling.
A $34-million contract Bruce Power has signed with Studsvik will see the Swedish company truck the steam generators, considered intermediate-level nuclear waste, to an ocean-bound transport at Owen Sound for the trip across the Atlantic.
Bruce Power spokesman John Peevers said the first phase will deal with 16 generators removed from Unit 1 and Unit 2. An additional 16 generators from Unit 3 and Unit 4 face the same fate in a few years when they are removed when those units are refurbished.
Peevers said a date has yet to be determined, but they are looking for it to happen in the fall.
"They are going to go by truck, one at a time from the site here to Owen Sound," said Peevers. "We are still looking at the route, which will have to undergo an engineering evaluation and approval from the province."
Peevers said the generators don't pose a risk to the public.
"They will be welded shut and they will be secure," said Peevers. "Once they are in Owen Sound they will be in a secured staging area until they get shipped off out of Owen Sound, through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, across the Atlantic and
to Sweden."
MORE:
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/Articl ... ?e=2463520
~ ~ ~ ~
Studsvik to recycle Bruce Power's old steam generators
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 10509.html
Sweden's Studsvik has been awarded a contract by Canada's Bruce Power for the dismantling and metal recycling of 32 old steam generators.
World Nuclear News, 11 May 2009
The steam generators will be treated at Studvik's facilities in Sweden between 2010 and 2018. The first 16 generators are scheduled for delivery in the spring of 2010. The steam generators weigh around 100 tonnes each. Up to 90% of the component volume is estimated to be released for regular recycling after treatment.
Studsvik said that the total order value is estimated at some SKr250 million ($32 million). The agreement is conditional upon finalizing related agreements and receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals.
Studsvik pioneered the treatment and recycling of steam generators from nuclear power plants in 2005. These components have traditionally been sent directly for final disposal or stored temporarily at nuclear power plants.
With Studsvik's method, large parts of the steam generators can be freely released, dramatically reducing the amount of waste that must be deposited. Duncan Hawthorne, president and CEO of Bruce Power, commented: "Studsvik's method offers an economically attractive approach to nuclear clean-up that is also environmentally responsible."
The technology which makes it possible to treat the steam generators was developed in a project that Studsvik conducted in cooperation with Sweden's Ringhals.
Studsvik subsequently received a contract from Vattenfall in July 2008 for the ismantling and metal recycling of three more old steam generators from the Ringhals nuclear power plant in Sweden. The contract - valued at some SKr34 million ($5.7 million) - was placed under an existing memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the two companies in 2006. The MoU regards the waste treatment in Studsvik's facilities of eight steam generators and two reactor pressure vessel heads from the Ringhals plant.
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 10509.html
=========================
3. Flaws must be fixed before nuclear revival
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/
Flaws+must+fixed+before+nuclear+revival/2643540/story.html
The Ottawa Citizen, Fri Mar 5 2010. Page: A11
Section: Letters, Byline: Trevor Findlay
Re: Demise of nuclear is being exaggerated, March 3. (Below)
As the author of The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 and its Implications for Safety, Security and Non-Proliferation, released by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) last month, I wish to respond to Patrick Moore's reading of it. [See Moore's article, below.]
To view or download a free copy of the report or Action Plan, please visit: http://www.cigionline.org.
Contrary to Moore's reading, the report does pour cold water on the notion of a global nuclear energy revival. While it is true that 52 nuclear power plants are currently under construction, several have been "under construction" for years, sometimes decades, some are resumed construction of abandoned projects and a couple are tiny experimental
Russian reactors.
Despite refurbishments and life extensions, some of this growth will be outweighed by the closure of old plants.
The major, actual new construction, as opposed to optimistic projections by the hardly disinterested World Nuclear Association, is restricted to China.
As a percentage of global electricity production, nuclear energy has declined since 2000. This does not a renaissance make.
The major barrier is economics. These are profoundly unfavourable to nuclear energy and getting worse, compared to coal, natural gas and alternative clean energy sources, as the government of Ontario has discovered.
The cost per reactor can go as high as $10 billion U.S. -- and they can take up to 10 years to build. Cost overruns and construction delays are legion.
MORE:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/
Flaws+must+fixed+before+nuclear+revival/2643540/story.html
- - - - -
Trevor Findlay, Director of the Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University and CIGI Senior Fellow
~ ~ ~ ~
Demise of nuclear is being exaggerated
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/
Demise+nuclear+being+exaggerated/2634928/story.html
The Ottawa Citizen, Wed Mar 3 2010, Page: A15
Section: Arguments, Byline: Patrick Moore
Recent media reports have suggested a respected institute has thrown cold water on the notion of a nuclear renaissance for Canada. My reading of the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) report is the renaissance may not come as fast here as in some other countries, but it is nonetheless real.
To view or download a free copy of the report or Action Plan, please visit: http://www.cigionline.org.
After all, the Chinese, Indians, Americans, French, Italians, South Koreans, and people from other nations are moving forward with nuclear power development.
Over 50 reactors are currently under construction in 13 countries. China alone has 20 nuclear power plants under construction, with many more being planned.
In the latest State of the Union, U.S. President Barack Obama proposed billions more in spending for nuclear energy. Even more recently, the president announced $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees to build two reactors at a nuclear power plant in Georgia, signalling the first wave of new nuclear plants in the U.S. in more than three decades.
To be sure, nuclear energy is undergoing a renaissance and its future is bright. The World Nuclear Association predicts the number of nuclear power plants may double worldwide by 2030.
More and more countries are recognizing that nuclear energy is clean, cost-effective, reliable and safe.
MORE: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/
Demise+nuclear+being+exaggerated/2634928/story.html
- - - -
An adviser to government and industry, Patrick Moore is a Greenpeace co-founder and chair and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies Ltd. in Vancouver (GreenspiritStrategies.com).
=======================
4. Ottawa to relax uranium rules
Mining heavyweight Cameco sees opportunity for international growth if other countries follow suit - Brenda Bouw
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/
ottawa-to-relax-uranium-rules/article1489049/
See also:
The Big Picture: Going for a rare find
Energy: 'Nuclear renaissance' sparks clamour for uranium
Mining: Between a rock and a rewarding place
VANCOUVER — From Thursday's Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Mar. 04, 2010 12:00AM EST Last updated on Friday, Mar. 05, 2010 3:12AM EST
A plan to relax foreign ownership rules in the uranium industry is back on Ottawa's agenda but isn't expected to lead to a takeover of Saskatchewan-based Cameco Corp., the world's top uranium producer, which is protected by separate legislation.
Meantime, Cameco reiterated its hope that opening Canada's doors to foreign investors will in turn give it access to mine ownership in other countries.
The push to increase foreign ownership in Canada's uranium sector was part of yesterday's Speech from the Throne, in which the government said it will "ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada's uranium mining industry by unduly restricting foreign investment."
It also vowed to "expand investment promotion in key markets."
A bill before the House of Commons specific to opening up investment in the uranium sector was put off before Parliament was prorogued in December.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/
ottawa-to-relax-uranium-rules/article1489049/
========================
5. Funds for legacy waste facility
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Ca ... 03107.html
04 March 2010
The government of Canada has awarded C$20 million ($19.4 million) for the design and construction oversight for a long-term facility to manage historic low-level radioactive waste at Port Hope in Ontario.
The contract, awarded to a joint venture of MMM Group Limited/Conestoga-Rovers and Associates Limited of Thornhill, Ontario, comes under the auspices of the Port Hope Area Initiative (PHAI), a federally-sponsored project which aims to remediate wastes from earliest days of the nuclear age.
Announcing the contract on behalf of Government Services Canada and Natural Resources Canada, member of parliament Rick Norlock described it as an important step forward. "Our goal is the cleanup and safe long-term management of historic low-level radioactive waste in the Port Hope area," he said.
The contract covers detailed design of the long-term waste management facility as well as the design of supporting infrastructure and planning the remediation of numerous other sites throughout the Port Hope municipality. Also included is the provision of building oversight during the construction phase. Design work is to begin immediately, with construction expected to start in 2011.
Numerous sites in the Port Hope municipality require remediation for wastes from the processing of radium, and later uranium, from 1933 to 1988. The PHAI was set up to address the remediation of the 17 major and 400 small-scale sites, plus remediation and closure of an existing waste storage site in Port Hope, as well as the remediation and closure of a storage site in the nearby municipality of Port Granby. In all, this will entail the excavation of about 1.2 million cubic meters of waste from the various locations in Port Hope and some 500,000 cubic meters of historic waste from the closed-down Port Granby waste management facility. A new long-term waste management facility will be constructed in each of the municipalities to house the consolidated waste.
The three-phase PHAI is now moving from the first, completed, phase of environmental assessments and licensing, into the second, implementation, phase. This phase will see the remediation of the contaminated sites and the construction of the new above-surface engineered waste management facilities. The third phase will be the long-term maintenance and monitoring of the facilities.
The PHAI is supported by the federal Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO), itself managed by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL).
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Ca ... 03107.html
===========================
6. No Nukes News - Mar. 5, 2010
I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait 'til oil and coal run out before we tackle that. - Thomas Edison (1847–1931)
Independent researchers have calculated that, in terms of carbon emissions avoided per dollar spent, nuclear is among the most expensive options, taking lifetime costs into account, not the cheapest. And of course the nuclear waste issue has not yet been resolved. - Trevor Findlay, author of The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 and its Implications for Safety, Security and Non-Proliferation
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Feds power up AECL spending by 50%
The deficit-ridden federal government has plowed an additional $182-million into Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to cover cost overruns in refurbishment projects and repairs to its isotope-producing research reactor at Chalk River. As a result, Ottawa allocated $824-million in the current fiscal year to the problem-plagued nuclear flagship as the government prepares to restructure it and sell its commercial division, according to supplemental estimates released late yesterday. That's a 50-per-cent increase from federal spending on AECL in the prior fiscal year.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... le1488992/
Budget puts climate action on ice
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/budget/
budget-puts-climate-action-on-ice/article1490411/
Environment, arts get short shrift in new budget
The environment, the arts, poverty and international initiatives are among the files that get short shrift in this year's budget. In the case of the environment, Equiterre's Stephen Guilbeault is crying false advertising. "Climate change is mentioned three times in the throne speech," said Guilbeault. "Nowhere is that commitment mentioned in the budget."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/
ALeqM5gijHxd_Jc9IKl3PIOuf2UY_rqEwg
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Time to rethink AECL’s meltdown
AECL, despite reviews and promises, has lost money every year since 1952
Even if the federal government were to commit Canadian taxpayers to bring AECL’s bid price down to some reasonable level, there are serious questions about whether AECL’s flagship Candu technology, which is based on exotic and super-costly heavy water, would be in Ontario’s best interests. The prospects AECL once claimed for near-term reactor sales of its new design in China, the U.K. and the U.S., have all dried up. Those countries are now all concentrating on light water technology which is cheaper to build, is cheaper to operate, is more productive and benefits from a wider pool of technology partners.
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fpcomment/
archive/2010/02/25/tom-adams-time-to-rethink-aecl-s-meltdown.aspx
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Flaws must be fixed before nuclear revival
Contrary to Moore's reading, the report does pour cold water on the notion of a global nuclear energy revival. The major barrier is economics. These are profoundly unfavourable to nuclear energy and getting worse, compared to coal, natural gas and alternative clean energy sources, as the government of Ontario has discovered.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/
Flaws+must+fixed+before+nuclear+revival/2643540/story.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Province committed to new nuclear at Darlington: energy minister
"Just in case there's any doubt at all, I want to assure you we're still very committed to building two new nuclear units in Darlington," said Energy and Infrastructure Minister Mr. Brad Duguid.
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/articlePrint/149453
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Watt guzzlers to get green retrofit
The cheapest megawatt is the one that's never used. "Industrial energy efficiency is usually overlooked because it's so unexciting, but it's one of the most cost-effective ways to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions," Stewart said.
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
774106--watt-guzzlers-to-get-green-retrofit
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
New Ads Challenge Obama on Nuclear Energy
Two excellent tv ads are being aired in South Carolina and Georgia. The first ad, titled "Family", lists past nuclear disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, and finishes with a close up on a child and the voice over "How would you feel about exposing your family to a potential radiation accident?" The second ad, "Risk," tied last year's financial hullabaloo to the potential for another nuclear bailout, similar to the nightmare scenario Mariah Blake describes in Mother Jones. "With cheaper, safer alternatives," the ad concludes, "why should taxpayers foot the bill for a new nuclear bailout?"
http://environment.change.org/blog/view/
new_ads_challenge_obama_on_nuclear_energy
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
New Nuclear – The Economics Say No
The Five Corporate Risks
There are five substantial areas of risk faced by developers of new nuclear power stations. Three of those risk areas are so big and significant that if they go wrong, the developer (even the biggest utilities) could be financially damaged beyond repair. These risks can be classed as Corporate Killers.
https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU27102.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Power Industry Faces Critical Labor Shortage
But now, as the industry receives unprecedented levels of government support, it's facing an all-out talent drought.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/
nuclear-power-industry-faces-critical-labor-shortage/19374206/
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear projects face financial obstacles
A new approach for easing the cost of new multibillion-dollar reactors, which can take years to complete, has provoked a backlash from big-business customers unwilling to go along.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03975.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Energy's Comeback Is Fueled By Lobbying Dollars, Not By Safer or Better Technology
Over 10 years, the industry has spent $1 million per every U.S. Senator and Representative, plus another $100 million for the White House, courts and media. Nothing about atomic energy has really changed. Except this: $645 million for lobbying Congress and the White House over the past 10 years.
http://www.alternet.org/story/145813/
nuclear_energy%27s_comeback_is_fueled_by_lobbying_dollars%2C_not_by_safer_or_better_technology
----------------------------------------------------------------
“Fourth-generation” nuclear power is another buzzword that has little success behind it
The idea is that these new reactors will close the loop for fuel and waste; that is, reprocess the spent rods into new fuel that can be reused. However, much like carbon capture and sequestration, this has yet to be done, despite over 60 years and billions of dollars in research. While some countries, like France and Japan, do reprocess fuel in a limited way, it still produces hundreds of tons of toxic waste, which could potentially be used in nuclear weapons. One French plant dumps 100 million gallons of liquid radioactive wastes into the English Channel every year, and the French government found the costs of reprocessing waste to cost $25 billion more than storing it. There is no truly closed-loop cycle; we will still have to mine uranium, a toxic process, and to contend with the spent nuclear waste, which still does not have a home despite years of wrangling on Yucca Mountain.
http://vtdigger.org/2010/03/03/
fourth-generation-nuclear-power-a-buzz-phrase-with-little-behind-it/
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Waste Watch
A Network of organizations concerned about high level radioactive waste and nuclear power in Canada
Position Statement and Background to nuclear waste storage in Canada
http://www.cnp.ca/nww/position.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sweden plans to build 2,000 wind turbines by 2020
The increase is equivalent to about half of the power generated by the country's nuclear reactors in 2009.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financia ... 6GRPG0.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Coal-Fired Power on the Way Out?
by Lester R. Brown
The principal reason for opposing coal plants is that they are changing the earth's climate. There is also the effect of mercury emissions on health and the 23,600 U.S. deaths each year from power plant air pollution.
What began as a few local ripples of resistance to coal-fired power quickly evolved into a national tidal wave of grassroots opposition from environmental, health, farm, and community organisations. Despite a heavily funded ad campaign to promote so-called clean coal (one reminiscent of the tobacco industry's earlier efforts to convince people that cigarettes were not unhealthy), the U.S. public is turning against coal.
The bottom line is that the United States now has, in effect, a de facto moratorium on the building of new coal-fired power plants. This has led the Sierra Club, the national leader on this issue, to expand its campaign to reduce carbon emissions to include the closing of existing plants.
If the efficiency level of the other 49 states were raised to that of New York, the most energy-efficient state, the energy saved would be sufficient to close 80 percent of the country's coal-fired power plants. The few remaining plants could be shut down by turning to renewable energy - wind farms, solar thermal power plants, solar cell rooftop arrays, and geothermal power and heat.
The handwriting is on the wall.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/25
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Thinking about solar panels?
Want to assess your site and the financial and environmental benefits?
The Toronto Renewable Energy Coop (TREC) has recently launched their ‘Our Power’ program to help residential homeowners with the assessment and purchase of PV solar panels for their rooftops. With Ontario’s new microFIT program in place, homeowners can get paid to generate renewable electricity on their roofs, directly offsetting fossil-fuelled power generation.
Find out how much you can make and how many tons of GHGs you will offset. Membership is free and your site assessment is only $25. Sign-up today at www.ourpower.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
In recognition of International Women's Day, CBC’s Sunday Edition with Michael Enright will feature a 25 minute segment on the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace.
Sunday, March 7, 2010. Time: 9a.m. - 12 noon (likely earlier in the morning, maybe even at 9 a.m.)
And on Mon. Mar. 8 at 7:30 p.m., at the Friends House, Toronto, join the Voice of Women for a coffeehouse and open mic night in celebration of IWD – sharing songs and poems for peace and justice.
For more info:
http://vowpeace.org/cms/Misc/Event/10-02-23/
International_Woman_s_Day_Coffeehouse_and_Open_Mic_Night.aspx
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff, Outreach Director, Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402
Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
===========================
7. Comment – Rempel: uranium pollution in war and peace, plus the risk of nuclear war
From: Jacob Rempel
To: Joyce Murray MP ; Stephane Dion ; Gerard Kennedy MP ; Dominic LeBlanc MP ; HallM@parl.gc.ca ; Trudeau.J@parl.gc.ca ; Jacob Rempel ; Garneau.M@parl.gc.ca ; Bob Rae MP ; John Ryan ; CotleI@parl.gc.ca ; SavagM@parl.gc.ca ; ScarpF@parl.gc.ca ; WilfeB@parl.gc.ca
Cc: Jack Layton MP ; Davies.D@parl.gc.ca ; JuliaP@parl.gc.ca ; DucepG@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 7:38 PM
REFERENCE: Below this email, I append several items related to the use of uranium in industry and in the US "war on terrorism" so-called for want of a more euphonious appellation.
___________________________________________
Dear Joyce, Stephane, Gerard, Justin, Dominic, and all your Commons colleagues, all parties ---
The dangers related to the uses of uranium can be ranked right up there with global warming and all other environmental degradation our present state of industrial development in Canada and worldwide.
I urge you to examine party policies with a view to harmonizing human activity with the natural processes of plants and animals. The Liberal Party "thinking meeting" in Montreal must not limit itself to short term electoral success measured in numbers of H of C seats and a few adaptations of policy to pacify critics.
Such harmonizing needs to start by harmonizing rhetoric and politics with other political parties which also have long term well-being as their ideals.
Just now that means cooperation by Liberals, the NDP and the Greens, who together have the critical measure of public support for success in an immediate election, success in thoroughly defeating the Cons.
IT'S NOT TRUE THAT THE PUBLIC DOES NOT WANT AN ELECTION.
If an election choice could defeat the Cons, the majority of voters would relish the opportunity to retire the Cons, who have only a modest one third of polling approval. Our last attempt to apply this information failed. We don't know all the reasons for that failure, but a good alternative is possible in the proposal written by Dr John Ryan of the University of Winnipeg a few years ago.
For a thorough analysis a one time electoral coalition, we can study the proposal written by John Ryan of the University of Winnipeg in an article written in 2008.
Such an electoral coalition would reinforce each of the three parties as independent entities with distinctive principles, but would recognize and implement their common policies ideals for a progressive social democratic political economy with social and cultural values identified with Canada.
I propose that Professor Ryan be invited to speak to the Liberal Party conference CANADA at 150. We can read his article in the journal "Global Research" under the title "Canada needs a Liberal-NDP-Green Coalition".
You can read the article at the URL
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=10742
=========================================
forwarding an email received from Elaine Hughes :--
Original Message From: Elaine Hughes
Subject: Atomic accomplice - Canada's uranium sales increase pollution and risk of rogue nuclear weapons.
To: SK Premier Wall ; Toxic Nation ; Fed. Pub.Safe.Min. Toews ; Fed. Health Min. Aglukkaq ; Sask Environmental Society ; Sask EcoNetwork ; Council of Canadians ; Fed. Envir. Min. Prentice ; Sierra Club - Can. ; Cdn.Inst.Env.Law & Policy
Cc: SK Green - Leader - Larissa Shasko ; SK Liberal - Leader - Ryan Bater ; SK Party Caucus ; SK NDP Caucus
Subject: Atomic accomplice - Canada's uranium sales increase pollution and risk of rogue nuclear weapons.- - - - - -
QUOTES: "Canada leads the world in uranium exports.. . . . This trade fits the profile of a psychopath, or black marketeer."
"Canada is doubly implicated in this because Saskatchewan's uranium mines are putting millions of kilograms of fissile material on the open market each year, and Alberta's infamous tar sands are spewing millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into the Earth's open skies."
= = = =
Atomic accomplice -- uranium sales increase pollution and risk of rogue nuclear weapons.
http://www.straightgoods.ca/
2010/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=274&Cookies=yes
Dateline: Monday, March 01, 2010 by Paul McKay
[Editor's note: below is an excerpt from Atomic Accomplice. The whole book is available for purchase from the address below.]
Canada has been dealing atoms since 1942, when the Mackenize King war cabinet approved joining the US nuclear bomb effort known as the Manhattan Project. It supplied key ingredients to US production plants and weapons laboratories making the weapons that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The prevailing myth is that this tragedy ended Canada's involvement with the military atom. But that is false. Instead, like a radioactive plume silently spreading out concentrically from an atomic blast, Canada has accelerated the global dispersal of weapons-related elements, technologies, and secrets.
As of 2008, the world's 440 power reactors collectively met only five percent of global energy demand — the same contribution as wood.
Much of this happened below the public and political radar, and has already helped in the making of nuclear bombs currently stored in the arsenals of the US, Britain, Russia, France, Israel, India, and Pakistan. Canada has also dealt atomic supplies and secrets to military dictatorships in Argentina, Taiwan, Romania, South Korea and Communist China.
We are still engaged in this deadly diaspora. Canada currently exports 7.3 million kilograms of uranium annually. When fissioned in any reactor of any owner or origin, this will create some 19,000 kilograms of plutonium each year, or enough to make 2,300 warheads annually if it is extracted from the spent fuel. These annual uranium exports also contain 52,000 kilograms of fissile uranium-235, or enough to make 2,600 atomic bombs each year.
Because it is essentially immortal, this 'embedded' Canadian plutonium and U235 will imperil global security for millennia because they will outlast hundreds of future governments in the recipient countries. Or, for all intents and purposes, the rest of human history.
MORE:
http://www.straightgoods.ca/2010/
ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=274&Cookies=yes
- - - -
Paul McKay is a multiple recipient of Canada's top journalism awards for investigative reporting, business and feature writing. He is a past winner of the Atkinson Fellowship in Public Policy, and was the 2005 Pierre Berton Writer-in-Residence. A series he wrote for the Ottawa Citizen was a finalist for the Governor General's Michener prize for public service journalism. He has also written four critically acclaimed books covering public policy, business biography, and true crime subjects. His feature writing has appeared in the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Vancouver Sun and Maclean's Magazine.
Copies of his latest book, Atomic Accomplice, can be purchased online at:
Website: http://www.paulmckay.com.
References
http://www.paulmckay.com/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Disturbing story of Fallujah's birth defects
Six years after the intense fighting began in the Iraqi town of Fallujah between US forces and Sunni insurgents, there is a... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8548961.stm
AND ALSO ---http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8548707.stm
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
New Video: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - Humanitarian intervention challenged
On the 10th anniversary of the US-NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia
A panel discussion at Montreal's Vanier College on NATO's 78-day bombing campaign of the then Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Speakers: Scott Taylor, publisher, author, war correspondent and ex-Canadian soldier, James Bissett, former Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia and David Orchard, author, environmentalist, farmer and politician.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon), Thursday, June 18, 2009. (also published in the Nipawin Journal, Moosoomin World-Spectator, Yorkton News-Review, SK and Edmonton Journal, AB).
"Uranium poses ethical, moral issues for Saskatchewan" By David Orchard
Saskatchewan has already embarked on uranium mining. Now our government is proposing a nuclear reactor, which will place the province squarely on the nuclear road. The implications do not appear well thought out. continued...
Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 7 p.m.
Prairieland Park Building, Saskatoon Exhibitions Grounds, Saskatoon, SK
David Orchard presents to the Saskatchewan Uranium Development Hearings
Audio Link
Public consultations are being held across Saskatchewan, May 26 - July 31, 2009, to hear responses to Capturing the Full Potential of the Uranium Value Chain in Saskatchewan, a provincial government report which recommends the construction of a Saskatchewan nuclear reactor and supports the burial of nuclear waste in that province, see here and here.
-----------------------------
Go here for The Future of Uranium in Saskatchewan: Public Consultation — Final Report
===============================
8. Nuclear Waste Pools in North Carolina
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/
4-nuclear-waste-pools-in-north-carolina/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
“Pools of Fire” - IN TOP 25 CENSORED STORIES FOR 2010
PROJECT CENSORED FRIDAY, MARCH 5TH, 2010
Source: CounterPunch, August 9, 2008
Title: “Pools of Fire”
Author: Jeffrey St. Clair
http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles5/St. ... s-Nuke.htm
Student Researchers: Krisden Kidd and Karene Schelert
Faculty Evaluator: Heidi LaMoreaux, PhD
Sonoma State University
One of the most lethal patches of ground in North America is located in the backwoods of North Carolina, where Shearon Harris nuclear plant is housed and owned by Progress Energy. The plant contains the largest radioactive waste storage pools in the country. It is not just a nuclear-power-generating station, but also a repository for highly radioactive spent fuel rods from two other nuclear plants. The spent fuel rods are transported by rail and stored in four densely packed pools filled with circulating cold water to keep the waste from heating. The Department of Homeland Security has marked Shearon Harris as one of the most vulnerable terrorist targets in the nation.
The threat exists, however, without the speculation of terrorist attack. Should the cooling system malfunction, the resulting fire would be virtually unquenchable and could trigger a nuclear meltdown, putting more than two hundred million residents of this rapidly growing section of North Carolina in extreme peril. A recent study by Brookhaven Labs estimates that a pool fire could cause 140,000 cancers, contaminate thousands of square miles of land, and cause over $500 billion in off-site property damage.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has estimated that there is a 1:100 chance of pool fire happening under the best of scenarios. And the dossier on the Shearon Harris plant is far from the best.
MORE: http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles5/St. ... s-Nuke.htm
- - - - -
See the full list of Top 25 Censored Stories for 2010:
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/category/
two-thousand-and-ten-book/
=========================
9. Uranium in the Grand Canyon: 1 Million Acres that Could Help Fuel a U.S. Nuclear Energy Revival
http://www.alternet.org/story/145880/
By David Levitan, SolveClimate
Posted on March 3, 2010, Printed on March 5, 2010
This post originally appeared on SolveClimate.
The dramatic potential for a meltdown and the dilemma posed by spent fuel tend to dominate discussions of nuclear power’s drawbacks, making it easy to forget the front end of that equation: uranium mining.
The United States imports the bulk of its nuclear fuel, but there are large deposits of uranium, mostly in the western part of the country, that could be mined. A new report from the U.S. Geological Survey looks at one such parcel of land in the Grand Canyon watershed area. It suggests that previous mining activity in the region has not resulted in serious contamination of soil or groundwater, but environmental groups and others are still trying to halt what they fear could become a huge upsurge in uranium mining activity.
The study focused on an area covering about 1 million acres around the Grand Canyon — including land within a few miles of the Colorado River — where the Department of the Interior enacted a land segregation order in July 2009. That order started a two-year period during which the DOI will assess the impacts of extracting the resource and will eventually decide whether or not to "withdraw" the land from consideration for mining under the Mining Law of 1872; that withdrawal would last 20 years.
Roger Clark, the air and energy program director at the environmental group Grand Canyon Trust, said that commercial interest in uranium mining swung in the last decade when the price of the fuel shot from around $5 per pound to over $100 until settling recently to just below $50.
“With that upsurge in price of milled uranium, the demand has gone up, and the number of claims around the Grand Canyon has surged,” he said. “More than 10,000 new claims were filed in the last five years.”
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145880/
=========================
10. End of the line for Yucca Mountain
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_En ... 03101.html
04 March 2010
The withdrawal of its licence application yesterday marked the official end of the Yucca Mountain repository project.
The landmark means that efforts to make real the pledges of the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act resulted only in $10 billion of spending on a project now described as "not an option." The project came to an official halt yesterday when the Department of Energy (DoE) filed a motion with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to withdraw the application to build and operate Yucca Mountain.
About one year ago President Barack Obama cut all funding for the DoE's work towards realising Yucca Mountain apart from answering questions from the NRC related to the license application.
However, "President Obama is fully committed to ensuring that the nation meets our long-term storage obligations for nuclear waste," said Scott Blake Harris of the DoE. The route for this is to be the 15-member Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, nominated last month. It is to evaluate fuel-cycle and disposal options, including the reprocessing of used nuclear fuel, but will not touch on any siting concerns. Work for the group begins with its first meeting on 25-26 March and will continue until 2012.
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_En ... 03101.html
=======================
11. Americans wary of nuclear waste, safety issues
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/
NP-Americans_wary_of_nuclear_waste_safety_issues-0403104.html
04 March 2010
Almost half of Americans are in favour of new nuclear power plants being built in the USA, but the majority said they are concerned about radioactive waste management, plant safety and nuclear material falling into the wrong hands, a new public opinion poll shows.
The poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion - a practice of Canada-based Vision Critical – questioned 1010 randomly-selected adult Americans between 19 and 21 February 2010 in an online survey.
The results showed that 48% of respondents were in favour of constructing new power reactors in the USA, with 21% saying they strongly support this. However, 34% said they opposed building new nuclear power plants, with 18% saying they strongly opposed this. Another 18% of respondents also said they were not sure on the issue.
More respondents (41%) agreed that the USA "should further pursue its nuclear energy capabilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions" than those who thought that the country "should avoid nuclear energy and focus on other carbon-free sources of energy" (38%). Respondents not sure which option was closest to their own opinion made up 21%.
The results of the poll also showed high concerns about nuclear waste, safety of reactors and proliferation issues.
When asked if they were concerned about the management of radioactive waste, 81% of Americans said they were, 51% being very concerned, while only 16% said they were less concerned. Just 4% of respondents said they were not at all concerned about waste.
With regards to safety, 72% of respondents said they were concerned (44% being very concerned) that an accident could occur at a US nuclear power plant, while 25% were less concerned (8% were not at all concerned). A similar number (73% concerned, 24% less concerned) responded when asked about health risks to communities close to nuclear power plants.
Concerns were also found that nuclear technology could fall into the hands of terrorists, with 74% of respondents saying they were worried about this, while 23% said they were not.
MORE: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/
NP-Americans_wary_of_nuclear_waste_safety_issues-0403104.html
=========================
12. UK faces struggle to find site for £12bn nuclear waste storage
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/
7362372/UK-faces-struggle-to-find-site-for-12bn-nuclear-waste-storage.html
Britain may not find a suitable place for a planned £12bn hole, where ministers want to bury radioactive waste from new nuclear power stations, the Government's own advisers have warned.
By Rowena Mason Published: 6:30AM GMT 04 Mar 2010
EDF, the French utility company, and Centrica, the owner of British Gas, plan to build the first new nuclear power stations in the UK by 2017.
The 10 new power stations will need a deep "geological disposal facility" to store the 200 tonnes of high-level waste due to be produced every year.
However, an independent committee, set up by the Government in 2003, has said it was still "unclear" what will happen to its waste in the long-term, and "insufficient attention" has been paid to public confidence in disposal of radioactive material.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) also concluded that while "some plans exist" to deal with the UK's high-level waste, whether they are effective is "a matter of judgment".
It also raised fears that the Government may try to impose a giant waste storage facility on a hostile community, if no UK region agrees to take on the waste.
So far, only Cumbria has submitted an "expression of interest" in potentially taking on the waste.
In the short term, waste may be held on the sites of nuclear reactors for a number of decades. Lack of clarity over short-term storage could cause delays to the nuclear programme, but it now appears possible that EDF and Centrica's plants could start generating without plans for long-term waste disposal in place.
The Government has also yet to publish plans on exactly who will be liable for the costs of long-term disposal.
MORE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/
7362372/UK-faces-struggle-to-find-site-for-12bn-nuclear-waste-storage.html
Compilation:
1. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) SK 2010 Federal Budget Reaction
2. Mildly radioactive parts to move through city port/Studsvik
3. Flaws must be fixed before nuclear revival
4. Ottawa to relax uranium rules
5. Funds for legacy waste facility
6. No Nukes News - Mar. 5, 2010
7. Comment – Rempel: uranium pollution in war and peace, plus the risk of nuclear war
8. Nuclear Waste Pools in North Carolina
9. Uranium in the Grand Canyon: 1 Million Acres that Could Help Fuel a U.S. Nuclear Energy Revival
10. End of the line for Yucca Mountain
11. Americans wary of nuclear waste, safety issues
12. UK faces struggle to find site for £12bn nuclear waste storage
=======================
1. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) SK 2010 Federal Budget Reaction
From: "- Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives" <ccpa.sask@sasktel.net>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 10:32 AM
Hi all,
Some comments from myself, Dave Winter of the Canadian Labour Congress and PSAC on yesterday's federal budget.
http://www.leaderpost.com/business/
Regina+business+leaders+applaud+federal+budget+public+
sector+freeze+unions+call+attack/2642867/story.html
Sincerely,
Simon Enoch, PhD, Director
Saskatchewan Office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA)
Suite G–2835, 13th Avenue, Regina, Sk. S4T 1N6
Office Phone:(306) 924-3372
E-mail: ccpasask@sasktel.net
- - - - -
Are you a member? The best way to ensure progressive research continues to be published in Saskatchwan is by joining the CCPA. To find out how you can support the CCPA call our office - Join Today!
=============================
2. Mildly radioactive parts to move through city port
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/Articl ... ?e=2463520
Bruce steam generators to be recycled
By ROB GOWAN, Owen Sound Sun Times Staff, TROY PATTERSON, QMI Agency February 24 2010
Sixteen 100-tonne, school-bus size steam generators, considered nuclear waste, are to go through Owen Sound en route to Sweden for recycling.
A $34-million contract Bruce Power has signed with Studsvik will see the Swedish company truck the steam generators, considered intermediate-level nuclear waste, to an ocean-bound transport at Owen Sound for the trip across the Atlantic.
Bruce Power spokesman John Peevers said the first phase will deal with 16 generators removed from Unit 1 and Unit 2. An additional 16 generators from Unit 3 and Unit 4 face the same fate in a few years when they are removed when those units are refurbished.
Peevers said a date has yet to be determined, but they are looking for it to happen in the fall.
"They are going to go by truck, one at a time from the site here to Owen Sound," said Peevers. "We are still looking at the route, which will have to undergo an engineering evaluation and approval from the province."
Peevers said the generators don't pose a risk to the public.
"They will be welded shut and they will be secure," said Peevers. "Once they are in Owen Sound they will be in a secured staging area until they get shipped off out of Owen Sound, through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, across the Atlantic and
to Sweden."
MORE:
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/Articl ... ?e=2463520
~ ~ ~ ~
Studsvik to recycle Bruce Power's old steam generators
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 10509.html
Sweden's Studsvik has been awarded a contract by Canada's Bruce Power for the dismantling and metal recycling of 32 old steam generators.
World Nuclear News, 11 May 2009
The steam generators will be treated at Studvik's facilities in Sweden between 2010 and 2018. The first 16 generators are scheduled for delivery in the spring of 2010. The steam generators weigh around 100 tonnes each. Up to 90% of the component volume is estimated to be released for regular recycling after treatment.
Studsvik said that the total order value is estimated at some SKr250 million ($32 million). The agreement is conditional upon finalizing related agreements and receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals.
Studsvik pioneered the treatment and recycling of steam generators from nuclear power plants in 2005. These components have traditionally been sent directly for final disposal or stored temporarily at nuclear power plants.
With Studsvik's method, large parts of the steam generators can be freely released, dramatically reducing the amount of waste that must be deposited. Duncan Hawthorne, president and CEO of Bruce Power, commented: "Studsvik's method offers an economically attractive approach to nuclear clean-up that is also environmentally responsible."
The technology which makes it possible to treat the steam generators was developed in a project that Studsvik conducted in cooperation with Sweden's Ringhals.
Studsvik subsequently received a contract from Vattenfall in July 2008 for the ismantling and metal recycling of three more old steam generators from the Ringhals nuclear power plant in Sweden. The contract - valued at some SKr34 million ($5.7 million) - was placed under an existing memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the two companies in 2006. The MoU regards the waste treatment in Studsvik's facilities of eight steam generators and two reactor pressure vessel heads from the Ringhals plant.
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-St ... 10509.html
=========================
3. Flaws must be fixed before nuclear revival
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/
Flaws+must+fixed+before+nuclear+revival/2643540/story.html
The Ottawa Citizen, Fri Mar 5 2010. Page: A11
Section: Letters, Byline: Trevor Findlay
Re: Demise of nuclear is being exaggerated, March 3. (Below)
As the author of The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 and its Implications for Safety, Security and Non-Proliferation, released by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) last month, I wish to respond to Patrick Moore's reading of it. [See Moore's article, below.]
To view or download a free copy of the report or Action Plan, please visit: http://www.cigionline.org.
Contrary to Moore's reading, the report does pour cold water on the notion of a global nuclear energy revival. While it is true that 52 nuclear power plants are currently under construction, several have been "under construction" for years, sometimes decades, some are resumed construction of abandoned projects and a couple are tiny experimental
Russian reactors.
Despite refurbishments and life extensions, some of this growth will be outweighed by the closure of old plants.
The major, actual new construction, as opposed to optimistic projections by the hardly disinterested World Nuclear Association, is restricted to China.
As a percentage of global electricity production, nuclear energy has declined since 2000. This does not a renaissance make.
The major barrier is economics. These are profoundly unfavourable to nuclear energy and getting worse, compared to coal, natural gas and alternative clean energy sources, as the government of Ontario has discovered.
The cost per reactor can go as high as $10 billion U.S. -- and they can take up to 10 years to build. Cost overruns and construction delays are legion.
MORE:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/
Flaws+must+fixed+before+nuclear+revival/2643540/story.html
- - - - -
Trevor Findlay, Director of the Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University and CIGI Senior Fellow
~ ~ ~ ~
Demise of nuclear is being exaggerated
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/
Demise+nuclear+being+exaggerated/2634928/story.html
The Ottawa Citizen, Wed Mar 3 2010, Page: A15
Section: Arguments, Byline: Patrick Moore
Recent media reports have suggested a respected institute has thrown cold water on the notion of a nuclear renaissance for Canada. My reading of the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) report is the renaissance may not come as fast here as in some other countries, but it is nonetheless real.
To view or download a free copy of the report or Action Plan, please visit: http://www.cigionline.org.
After all, the Chinese, Indians, Americans, French, Italians, South Koreans, and people from other nations are moving forward with nuclear power development.
Over 50 reactors are currently under construction in 13 countries. China alone has 20 nuclear power plants under construction, with many more being planned.
In the latest State of the Union, U.S. President Barack Obama proposed billions more in spending for nuclear energy. Even more recently, the president announced $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees to build two reactors at a nuclear power plant in Georgia, signalling the first wave of new nuclear plants in the U.S. in more than three decades.
To be sure, nuclear energy is undergoing a renaissance and its future is bright. The World Nuclear Association predicts the number of nuclear power plants may double worldwide by 2030.
More and more countries are recognizing that nuclear energy is clean, cost-effective, reliable and safe.
MORE: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/
Demise+nuclear+being+exaggerated/2634928/story.html
- - - -
An adviser to government and industry, Patrick Moore is a Greenpeace co-founder and chair and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies Ltd. in Vancouver (GreenspiritStrategies.com).
=======================
4. Ottawa to relax uranium rules
Mining heavyweight Cameco sees opportunity for international growth if other countries follow suit - Brenda Bouw
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/
ottawa-to-relax-uranium-rules/article1489049/
See also:
The Big Picture: Going for a rare find
Energy: 'Nuclear renaissance' sparks clamour for uranium
Mining: Between a rock and a rewarding place
VANCOUVER — From Thursday's Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Mar. 04, 2010 12:00AM EST Last updated on Friday, Mar. 05, 2010 3:12AM EST
A plan to relax foreign ownership rules in the uranium industry is back on Ottawa's agenda but isn't expected to lead to a takeover of Saskatchewan-based Cameco Corp., the world's top uranium producer, which is protected by separate legislation.
Meantime, Cameco reiterated its hope that opening Canada's doors to foreign investors will in turn give it access to mine ownership in other countries.
The push to increase foreign ownership in Canada's uranium sector was part of yesterday's Speech from the Throne, in which the government said it will "ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada's uranium mining industry by unduly restricting foreign investment."
It also vowed to "expand investment promotion in key markets."
A bill before the House of Commons specific to opening up investment in the uranium sector was put off before Parliament was prorogued in December.
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/
ottawa-to-relax-uranium-rules/article1489049/
========================
5. Funds for legacy waste facility
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Ca ... 03107.html
04 March 2010
The government of Canada has awarded C$20 million ($19.4 million) for the design and construction oversight for a long-term facility to manage historic low-level radioactive waste at Port Hope in Ontario.
The contract, awarded to a joint venture of MMM Group Limited/Conestoga-Rovers and Associates Limited of Thornhill, Ontario, comes under the auspices of the Port Hope Area Initiative (PHAI), a federally-sponsored project which aims to remediate wastes from earliest days of the nuclear age.
Announcing the contract on behalf of Government Services Canada and Natural Resources Canada, member of parliament Rick Norlock described it as an important step forward. "Our goal is the cleanup and safe long-term management of historic low-level radioactive waste in the Port Hope area," he said.
The contract covers detailed design of the long-term waste management facility as well as the design of supporting infrastructure and planning the remediation of numerous other sites throughout the Port Hope municipality. Also included is the provision of building oversight during the construction phase. Design work is to begin immediately, with construction expected to start in 2011.
Numerous sites in the Port Hope municipality require remediation for wastes from the processing of radium, and later uranium, from 1933 to 1988. The PHAI was set up to address the remediation of the 17 major and 400 small-scale sites, plus remediation and closure of an existing waste storage site in Port Hope, as well as the remediation and closure of a storage site in the nearby municipality of Port Granby. In all, this will entail the excavation of about 1.2 million cubic meters of waste from the various locations in Port Hope and some 500,000 cubic meters of historic waste from the closed-down Port Granby waste management facility. A new long-term waste management facility will be constructed in each of the municipalities to house the consolidated waste.
The three-phase PHAI is now moving from the first, completed, phase of environmental assessments and licensing, into the second, implementation, phase. This phase will see the remediation of the contaminated sites and the construction of the new above-surface engineered waste management facilities. The third phase will be the long-term maintenance and monitoring of the facilities.
The PHAI is supported by the federal Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO), itself managed by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL).
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Ca ... 03107.html
===========================
6. No Nukes News - Mar. 5, 2010
I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait 'til oil and coal run out before we tackle that. - Thomas Edison (1847–1931)
Independent researchers have calculated that, in terms of carbon emissions avoided per dollar spent, nuclear is among the most expensive options, taking lifetime costs into account, not the cheapest. And of course the nuclear waste issue has not yet been resolved. - Trevor Findlay, author of The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 and its Implications for Safety, Security and Non-Proliferation
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Feds power up AECL spending by 50%
The deficit-ridden federal government has plowed an additional $182-million into Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to cover cost overruns in refurbishment projects and repairs to its isotope-producing research reactor at Chalk River. As a result, Ottawa allocated $824-million in the current fiscal year to the problem-plagued nuclear flagship as the government prepares to restructure it and sell its commercial division, according to supplemental estimates released late yesterday. That's a 50-per-cent increase from federal spending on AECL in the prior fiscal year.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... le1488992/
Budget puts climate action on ice
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/budget/
budget-puts-climate-action-on-ice/article1490411/
Environment, arts get short shrift in new budget
The environment, the arts, poverty and international initiatives are among the files that get short shrift in this year's budget. In the case of the environment, Equiterre's Stephen Guilbeault is crying false advertising. "Climate change is mentioned three times in the throne speech," said Guilbeault. "Nowhere is that commitment mentioned in the budget."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/
ALeqM5gijHxd_Jc9IKl3PIOuf2UY_rqEwg
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Time to rethink AECL’s meltdown
AECL, despite reviews and promises, has lost money every year since 1952
Even if the federal government were to commit Canadian taxpayers to bring AECL’s bid price down to some reasonable level, there are serious questions about whether AECL’s flagship Candu technology, which is based on exotic and super-costly heavy water, would be in Ontario’s best interests. The prospects AECL once claimed for near-term reactor sales of its new design in China, the U.K. and the U.S., have all dried up. Those countries are now all concentrating on light water technology which is cheaper to build, is cheaper to operate, is more productive and benefits from a wider pool of technology partners.
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fpcomment/
archive/2010/02/25/tom-adams-time-to-rethink-aecl-s-meltdown.aspx
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Flaws must be fixed before nuclear revival
Contrary to Moore's reading, the report does pour cold water on the notion of a global nuclear energy revival. The major barrier is economics. These are profoundly unfavourable to nuclear energy and getting worse, compared to coal, natural gas and alternative clean energy sources, as the government of Ontario has discovered.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/
Flaws+must+fixed+before+nuclear+revival/2643540/story.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Province committed to new nuclear at Darlington: energy minister
"Just in case there's any doubt at all, I want to assure you we're still very committed to building two new nuclear units in Darlington," said Energy and Infrastructure Minister Mr. Brad Duguid.
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/articlePrint/149453
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Watt guzzlers to get green retrofit
The cheapest megawatt is the one that's never used. "Industrial energy efficiency is usually overlooked because it's so unexciting, but it's one of the most cost-effective ways to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions," Stewart said.
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/
774106--watt-guzzlers-to-get-green-retrofit
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
New Ads Challenge Obama on Nuclear Energy
Two excellent tv ads are being aired in South Carolina and Georgia. The first ad, titled "Family", lists past nuclear disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, and finishes with a close up on a child and the voice over "How would you feel about exposing your family to a potential radiation accident?" The second ad, "Risk," tied last year's financial hullabaloo to the potential for another nuclear bailout, similar to the nightmare scenario Mariah Blake describes in Mother Jones. "With cheaper, safer alternatives," the ad concludes, "why should taxpayers foot the bill for a new nuclear bailout?"
http://environment.change.org/blog/view/
new_ads_challenge_obama_on_nuclear_energy
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
New Nuclear – The Economics Say No
The Five Corporate Risks
There are five substantial areas of risk faced by developers of new nuclear power stations. Three of those risk areas are so big and significant that if they go wrong, the developer (even the biggest utilities) could be financially damaged beyond repair. These risks can be classed as Corporate Killers.
https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU27102.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Power Industry Faces Critical Labor Shortage
But now, as the industry receives unprecedented levels of government support, it's facing an all-out talent drought.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/
nuclear-power-industry-faces-critical-labor-shortage/19374206/
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear projects face financial obstacles
A new approach for easing the cost of new multibillion-dollar reactors, which can take years to complete, has provoked a backlash from big-business customers unwilling to go along.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03975.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Energy's Comeback Is Fueled By Lobbying Dollars, Not By Safer or Better Technology
Over 10 years, the industry has spent $1 million per every U.S. Senator and Representative, plus another $100 million for the White House, courts and media. Nothing about atomic energy has really changed. Except this: $645 million for lobbying Congress and the White House over the past 10 years.
http://www.alternet.org/story/145813/
nuclear_energy%27s_comeback_is_fueled_by_lobbying_dollars%2C_not_by_safer_or_better_technology
----------------------------------------------------------------
“Fourth-generation” nuclear power is another buzzword that has little success behind it
The idea is that these new reactors will close the loop for fuel and waste; that is, reprocess the spent rods into new fuel that can be reused. However, much like carbon capture and sequestration, this has yet to be done, despite over 60 years and billions of dollars in research. While some countries, like France and Japan, do reprocess fuel in a limited way, it still produces hundreds of tons of toxic waste, which could potentially be used in nuclear weapons. One French plant dumps 100 million gallons of liquid radioactive wastes into the English Channel every year, and the French government found the costs of reprocessing waste to cost $25 billion more than storing it. There is no truly closed-loop cycle; we will still have to mine uranium, a toxic process, and to contend with the spent nuclear waste, which still does not have a home despite years of wrangling on Yucca Mountain.
http://vtdigger.org/2010/03/03/
fourth-generation-nuclear-power-a-buzz-phrase-with-little-behind-it/
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Waste Watch
A Network of organizations concerned about high level radioactive waste and nuclear power in Canada
Position Statement and Background to nuclear waste storage in Canada
http://www.cnp.ca/nww/position.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sweden plans to build 2,000 wind turbines by 2020
The increase is equivalent to about half of the power generated by the country's nuclear reactors in 2009.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financia ... 6GRPG0.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Coal-Fired Power on the Way Out?
by Lester R. Brown
The principal reason for opposing coal plants is that they are changing the earth's climate. There is also the effect of mercury emissions on health and the 23,600 U.S. deaths each year from power plant air pollution.
What began as a few local ripples of resistance to coal-fired power quickly evolved into a national tidal wave of grassroots opposition from environmental, health, farm, and community organisations. Despite a heavily funded ad campaign to promote so-called clean coal (one reminiscent of the tobacco industry's earlier efforts to convince people that cigarettes were not unhealthy), the U.S. public is turning against coal.
The bottom line is that the United States now has, in effect, a de facto moratorium on the building of new coal-fired power plants. This has led the Sierra Club, the national leader on this issue, to expand its campaign to reduce carbon emissions to include the closing of existing plants.
If the efficiency level of the other 49 states were raised to that of New York, the most energy-efficient state, the energy saved would be sufficient to close 80 percent of the country's coal-fired power plants. The few remaining plants could be shut down by turning to renewable energy - wind farms, solar thermal power plants, solar cell rooftop arrays, and geothermal power and heat.
The handwriting is on the wall.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/25
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Thinking about solar panels?
Want to assess your site and the financial and environmental benefits?
The Toronto Renewable Energy Coop (TREC) has recently launched their ‘Our Power’ program to help residential homeowners with the assessment and purchase of PV solar panels for their rooftops. With Ontario’s new microFIT program in place, homeowners can get paid to generate renewable electricity on their roofs, directly offsetting fossil-fuelled power generation.
Find out how much you can make and how many tons of GHGs you will offset. Membership is free and your site assessment is only $25. Sign-up today at www.ourpower.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
In recognition of International Women's Day, CBC’s Sunday Edition with Michael Enright will feature a 25 minute segment on the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace.
Sunday, March 7, 2010. Time: 9a.m. - 12 noon (likely earlier in the morning, maybe even at 9 a.m.)
And on Mon. Mar. 8 at 7:30 p.m., at the Friends House, Toronto, join the Voice of Women for a coffeehouse and open mic night in celebration of IWD – sharing songs and poems for peace and justice.
For more info:
http://vowpeace.org/cms/Misc/Event/10-02-23/
International_Woman_s_Day_Coffeehouse_and_Open_Mic_Night.aspx
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Bischoff, Outreach Director, Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Tel: 416 926 1907 x 246
625 Church Street, #402
Toronto, ON M4Y 2G1
angela@cleanairalliance.org
www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca
www.cleanairalliance.org
Our Facebook Group
Sign Our Petition
No Nukes News
Health Power
===========================
7. Comment – Rempel: uranium pollution in war and peace, plus the risk of nuclear war
From: Jacob Rempel
To: Joyce Murray MP ; Stephane Dion ; Gerard Kennedy MP ; Dominic LeBlanc MP ; HallM@parl.gc.ca ; Trudeau.J@parl.gc.ca ; Jacob Rempel ; Garneau.M@parl.gc.ca ; Bob Rae MP ; John Ryan ; CotleI@parl.gc.ca ; SavagM@parl.gc.ca ; ScarpF@parl.gc.ca ; WilfeB@parl.gc.ca
Cc: Jack Layton MP ; Davies.D@parl.gc.ca ; JuliaP@parl.gc.ca ; DucepG@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 7:38 PM
REFERENCE: Below this email, I append several items related to the use of uranium in industry and in the US "war on terrorism" so-called for want of a more euphonious appellation.
___________________________________________
Dear Joyce, Stephane, Gerard, Justin, Dominic, and all your Commons colleagues, all parties ---
The dangers related to the uses of uranium can be ranked right up there with global warming and all other environmental degradation our present state of industrial development in Canada and worldwide.
I urge you to examine party policies with a view to harmonizing human activity with the natural processes of plants and animals. The Liberal Party "thinking meeting" in Montreal must not limit itself to short term electoral success measured in numbers of H of C seats and a few adaptations of policy to pacify critics.
Such harmonizing needs to start by harmonizing rhetoric and politics with other political parties which also have long term well-being as their ideals.
Just now that means cooperation by Liberals, the NDP and the Greens, who together have the critical measure of public support for success in an immediate election, success in thoroughly defeating the Cons.
IT'S NOT TRUE THAT THE PUBLIC DOES NOT WANT AN ELECTION.
If an election choice could defeat the Cons, the majority of voters would relish the opportunity to retire the Cons, who have only a modest one third of polling approval. Our last attempt to apply this information failed. We don't know all the reasons for that failure, but a good alternative is possible in the proposal written by Dr John Ryan of the University of Winnipeg a few years ago.
For a thorough analysis a one time electoral coalition, we can study the proposal written by John Ryan of the University of Winnipeg in an article written in 2008.
Such an electoral coalition would reinforce each of the three parties as independent entities with distinctive principles, but would recognize and implement their common policies ideals for a progressive social democratic political economy with social and cultural values identified with Canada.
I propose that Professor Ryan be invited to speak to the Liberal Party conference CANADA at 150. We can read his article in the journal "Global Research" under the title "Canada needs a Liberal-NDP-Green Coalition".
You can read the article at the URL
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=10742
=========================================
forwarding an email received from Elaine Hughes :--
Original Message From: Elaine Hughes
Subject: Atomic accomplice - Canada's uranium sales increase pollution and risk of rogue nuclear weapons.
To: SK Premier Wall ; Toxic Nation ; Fed. Pub.Safe.Min. Toews ; Fed. Health Min. Aglukkaq ; Sask Environmental Society ; Sask EcoNetwork ; Council of Canadians ; Fed. Envir. Min. Prentice ; Sierra Club - Can. ; Cdn.Inst.Env.Law & Policy
Cc: SK Green - Leader - Larissa Shasko ; SK Liberal - Leader - Ryan Bater ; SK Party Caucus ; SK NDP Caucus
Subject: Atomic accomplice - Canada's uranium sales increase pollution and risk of rogue nuclear weapons.- - - - - -
QUOTES: "Canada leads the world in uranium exports.. . . . This trade fits the profile of a psychopath, or black marketeer."
"Canada is doubly implicated in this because Saskatchewan's uranium mines are putting millions of kilograms of fissile material on the open market each year, and Alberta's infamous tar sands are spewing millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into the Earth's open skies."
= = = =
Atomic accomplice -- uranium sales increase pollution and risk of rogue nuclear weapons.
http://www.straightgoods.ca/
2010/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=274&Cookies=yes
Dateline: Monday, March 01, 2010 by Paul McKay
[Editor's note: below is an excerpt from Atomic Accomplice. The whole book is available for purchase from the address below.]
Canada has been dealing atoms since 1942, when the Mackenize King war cabinet approved joining the US nuclear bomb effort known as the Manhattan Project. It supplied key ingredients to US production plants and weapons laboratories making the weapons that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The prevailing myth is that this tragedy ended Canada's involvement with the military atom. But that is false. Instead, like a radioactive plume silently spreading out concentrically from an atomic blast, Canada has accelerated the global dispersal of weapons-related elements, technologies, and secrets.
As of 2008, the world's 440 power reactors collectively met only five percent of global energy demand — the same contribution as wood.
Much of this happened below the public and political radar, and has already helped in the making of nuclear bombs currently stored in the arsenals of the US, Britain, Russia, France, Israel, India, and Pakistan. Canada has also dealt atomic supplies and secrets to military dictatorships in Argentina, Taiwan, Romania, South Korea and Communist China.
We are still engaged in this deadly diaspora. Canada currently exports 7.3 million kilograms of uranium annually. When fissioned in any reactor of any owner or origin, this will create some 19,000 kilograms of plutonium each year, or enough to make 2,300 warheads annually if it is extracted from the spent fuel. These annual uranium exports also contain 52,000 kilograms of fissile uranium-235, or enough to make 2,600 atomic bombs each year.
Because it is essentially immortal, this 'embedded' Canadian plutonium and U235 will imperil global security for millennia because they will outlast hundreds of future governments in the recipient countries. Or, for all intents and purposes, the rest of human history.
MORE:
http://www.straightgoods.ca/2010/
ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=274&Cookies=yes
- - - -
Paul McKay is a multiple recipient of Canada's top journalism awards for investigative reporting, business and feature writing. He is a past winner of the Atkinson Fellowship in Public Policy, and was the 2005 Pierre Berton Writer-in-Residence. A series he wrote for the Ottawa Citizen was a finalist for the Governor General's Michener prize for public service journalism. He has also written four critically acclaimed books covering public policy, business biography, and true crime subjects. His feature writing has appeared in the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Vancouver Sun and Maclean's Magazine.
Copies of his latest book, Atomic Accomplice, can be purchased online at:
Website: http://www.paulmckay.com.
References
http://www.paulmckay.com/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Disturbing story of Fallujah's birth defects
Six years after the intense fighting began in the Iraqi town of Fallujah between US forces and Sunni insurgents, there is a... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8548961.stm
AND ALSO ---http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8548707.stm
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
New Video: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - Humanitarian intervention challenged
On the 10th anniversary of the US-NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia
A panel discussion at Montreal's Vanier College on NATO's 78-day bombing campaign of the then Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Speakers: Scott Taylor, publisher, author, war correspondent and ex-Canadian soldier, James Bissett, former Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia and David Orchard, author, environmentalist, farmer and politician.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon), Thursday, June 18, 2009. (also published in the Nipawin Journal, Moosoomin World-Spectator, Yorkton News-Review, SK and Edmonton Journal, AB).
"Uranium poses ethical, moral issues for Saskatchewan" By David Orchard
Saskatchewan has already embarked on uranium mining. Now our government is proposing a nuclear reactor, which will place the province squarely on the nuclear road. The implications do not appear well thought out. continued...
Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 7 p.m.
Prairieland Park Building, Saskatoon Exhibitions Grounds, Saskatoon, SK
David Orchard presents to the Saskatchewan Uranium Development Hearings
Audio Link
Public consultations are being held across Saskatchewan, May 26 - July 31, 2009, to hear responses to Capturing the Full Potential of the Uranium Value Chain in Saskatchewan, a provincial government report which recommends the construction of a Saskatchewan nuclear reactor and supports the burial of nuclear waste in that province, see here and here.
-----------------------------
Go here for The Future of Uranium in Saskatchewan: Public Consultation — Final Report
===============================
8. Nuclear Waste Pools in North Carolina
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/
4-nuclear-waste-pools-in-north-carolina/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
“Pools of Fire” - IN TOP 25 CENSORED STORIES FOR 2010
PROJECT CENSORED FRIDAY, MARCH 5TH, 2010
Source: CounterPunch, August 9, 2008
Title: “Pools of Fire”
Author: Jeffrey St. Clair
http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles5/St. ... s-Nuke.htm
Student Researchers: Krisden Kidd and Karene Schelert
Faculty Evaluator: Heidi LaMoreaux, PhD
Sonoma State University
One of the most lethal patches of ground in North America is located in the backwoods of North Carolina, where Shearon Harris nuclear plant is housed and owned by Progress Energy. The plant contains the largest radioactive waste storage pools in the country. It is not just a nuclear-power-generating station, but also a repository for highly radioactive spent fuel rods from two other nuclear plants. The spent fuel rods are transported by rail and stored in four densely packed pools filled with circulating cold water to keep the waste from heating. The Department of Homeland Security has marked Shearon Harris as one of the most vulnerable terrorist targets in the nation.
The threat exists, however, without the speculation of terrorist attack. Should the cooling system malfunction, the resulting fire would be virtually unquenchable and could trigger a nuclear meltdown, putting more than two hundred million residents of this rapidly growing section of North Carolina in extreme peril. A recent study by Brookhaven Labs estimates that a pool fire could cause 140,000 cancers, contaminate thousands of square miles of land, and cause over $500 billion in off-site property damage.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has estimated that there is a 1:100 chance of pool fire happening under the best of scenarios. And the dossier on the Shearon Harris plant is far from the best.
MORE: http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles5/St. ... s-Nuke.htm
- - - - -
See the full list of Top 25 Censored Stories for 2010:
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/category/
two-thousand-and-ten-book/
=========================
9. Uranium in the Grand Canyon: 1 Million Acres that Could Help Fuel a U.S. Nuclear Energy Revival
http://www.alternet.org/story/145880/
By David Levitan, SolveClimate
Posted on March 3, 2010, Printed on March 5, 2010
This post originally appeared on SolveClimate.
The dramatic potential for a meltdown and the dilemma posed by spent fuel tend to dominate discussions of nuclear power’s drawbacks, making it easy to forget the front end of that equation: uranium mining.
The United States imports the bulk of its nuclear fuel, but there are large deposits of uranium, mostly in the western part of the country, that could be mined. A new report from the U.S. Geological Survey looks at one such parcel of land in the Grand Canyon watershed area. It suggests that previous mining activity in the region has not resulted in serious contamination of soil or groundwater, but environmental groups and others are still trying to halt what they fear could become a huge upsurge in uranium mining activity.
The study focused on an area covering about 1 million acres around the Grand Canyon — including land within a few miles of the Colorado River — where the Department of the Interior enacted a land segregation order in July 2009. That order started a two-year period during which the DOI will assess the impacts of extracting the resource and will eventually decide whether or not to "withdraw" the land from consideration for mining under the Mining Law of 1872; that withdrawal would last 20 years.
Roger Clark, the air and energy program director at the environmental group Grand Canyon Trust, said that commercial interest in uranium mining swung in the last decade when the price of the fuel shot from around $5 per pound to over $100 until settling recently to just below $50.
“With that upsurge in price of milled uranium, the demand has gone up, and the number of claims around the Grand Canyon has surged,” he said. “More than 10,000 new claims were filed in the last five years.”
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145880/
=========================
10. End of the line for Yucca Mountain
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_En ... 03101.html
04 March 2010
The withdrawal of its licence application yesterday marked the official end of the Yucca Mountain repository project.
The landmark means that efforts to make real the pledges of the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act resulted only in $10 billion of spending on a project now described as "not an option." The project came to an official halt yesterday when the Department of Energy (DoE) filed a motion with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to withdraw the application to build and operate Yucca Mountain.
About one year ago President Barack Obama cut all funding for the DoE's work towards realising Yucca Mountain apart from answering questions from the NRC related to the license application.
However, "President Obama is fully committed to ensuring that the nation meets our long-term storage obligations for nuclear waste," said Scott Blake Harris of the DoE. The route for this is to be the 15-member Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, nominated last month. It is to evaluate fuel-cycle and disposal options, including the reprocessing of used nuclear fuel, but will not touch on any siting concerns. Work for the group begins with its first meeting on 25-26 March and will continue until 2012.
MORE:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_En ... 03101.html
=======================
11. Americans wary of nuclear waste, safety issues
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/
NP-Americans_wary_of_nuclear_waste_safety_issues-0403104.html
04 March 2010
Almost half of Americans are in favour of new nuclear power plants being built in the USA, but the majority said they are concerned about radioactive waste management, plant safety and nuclear material falling into the wrong hands, a new public opinion poll shows.
The poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion - a practice of Canada-based Vision Critical – questioned 1010 randomly-selected adult Americans between 19 and 21 February 2010 in an online survey.
The results showed that 48% of respondents were in favour of constructing new power reactors in the USA, with 21% saying they strongly support this. However, 34% said they opposed building new nuclear power plants, with 18% saying they strongly opposed this. Another 18% of respondents also said they were not sure on the issue.
More respondents (41%) agreed that the USA "should further pursue its nuclear energy capabilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions" than those who thought that the country "should avoid nuclear energy and focus on other carbon-free sources of energy" (38%). Respondents not sure which option was closest to their own opinion made up 21%.
The results of the poll also showed high concerns about nuclear waste, safety of reactors and proliferation issues.
When asked if they were concerned about the management of radioactive waste, 81% of Americans said they were, 51% being very concerned, while only 16% said they were less concerned. Just 4% of respondents said they were not at all concerned about waste.
With regards to safety, 72% of respondents said they were concerned (44% being very concerned) that an accident could occur at a US nuclear power plant, while 25% were less concerned (8% were not at all concerned). A similar number (73% concerned, 24% less concerned) responded when asked about health risks to communities close to nuclear power plants.
Concerns were also found that nuclear technology could fall into the hands of terrorists, with 74% of respondents saying they were worried about this, while 23% said they were not.
MORE: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/
NP-Americans_wary_of_nuclear_waste_safety_issues-0403104.html
=========================
12. UK faces struggle to find site for £12bn nuclear waste storage
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/
7362372/UK-faces-struggle-to-find-site-for-12bn-nuclear-waste-storage.html
Britain may not find a suitable place for a planned £12bn hole, where ministers want to bury radioactive waste from new nuclear power stations, the Government's own advisers have warned.
By Rowena Mason Published: 6:30AM GMT 04 Mar 2010
EDF, the French utility company, and Centrica, the owner of British Gas, plan to build the first new nuclear power stations in the UK by 2017.
The 10 new power stations will need a deep "geological disposal facility" to store the 200 tonnes of high-level waste due to be produced every year.
However, an independent committee, set up by the Government in 2003, has said it was still "unclear" what will happen to its waste in the long-term, and "insufficient attention" has been paid to public confidence in disposal of radioactive material.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) also concluded that while "some plans exist" to deal with the UK's high-level waste, whether they are effective is "a matter of judgment".
It also raised fears that the Government may try to impose a giant waste storage facility on a hostile community, if no UK region agrees to take on the waste.
So far, only Cumbria has submitted an "expression of interest" in potentially taking on the waste.
In the short term, waste may be held on the sites of nuclear reactors for a number of decades. Lack of clarity over short-term storage could cause delays to the nuclear programme, but it now appears possible that EDF and Centrica's plants could start generating without plans for long-term waste disposal in place.
The Government has also yet to publish plans on exactly who will be liable for the costs of long-term disposal.
MORE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/
7362372/UK-faces-struggle-to-find-site-for-12bn-nuclear-waste-storage.html
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NUKE NEWS: March 9, 2010
by Oscar » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:38 am
NUKE NEWS: March 9, 2010
Compilation:
1. EVENT: Morality, Nuclear Power, and Resistance: Environmental Activism in Saskatchewan, 2009 – Saskatoon - March 16, 2010
2. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
3. CIELAP Sustainability Event with Bob Willard - Toronto - March 31
4. Ottawa to rethink uranium rules
5. Cameco downgraded on price weakness
6. S.O.S. – Save Our Saskatchewan celebrated their one year anniversary.
7. Cameco’s Sponsorship Money – schools, public health institutions, etc. - March 9, 2010
8. The nuclear renaissance has begun
9. How Much Will Obama's Nuclear Blind Spot Cost America?
10. Revelations from an EDF insider: EPR reactor prone to major nuclear accident risk!
11. AECL to get $300-million boost
12. Exxon Must Pay $1.2 Million for Workers’ Radiation Exposure
13. BOOK: The Chernobyl catastrophe and its effects on language, health, politics, and the environment – Hoffman - March 8th, 2010
14. The Climate Change Propaganda War Is Just Getting Started
=========================
1. EVENT: Morality, Nuclear Power, and Resistance: Environmental Activism in Saskatchewan, 2009 – Saskatoon - March 16, 2010
SPEAKER: Alexander (Sandy) Ervin, Ph.D., Professor, University of Saskatchewan
WHERE: ARTS BLDG. Rm 134, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon
WHEN: Tuesday, March 16, 4:00 pm
Everyone welcome. Event is free. Discussion to follow.
Alexander (Sandy) Ervin’s current interests and research include political ecology, social movements, and the interplay of society and energy, as well as continued activities through applied anthropology and community-based engagement.
He is currently writing a book on cultural change and globalization, a synthesis of anthropology’s legacy and current
contributions.
*Colloquium Series*
Dept. of Religion and Culture
College of Arts and Science
=========================
2. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
www.bottledwaterfreeday.ca
With only 4 days to go until Canada’s first Bottled Water Free Day on March 11th, there is momentum across the country. Every day more and more individuals, schools, municipalities, environmental organizations and unions are signing the pledge!
“The Story of Bottled Water” – Watch the Trailer: http://storyofstuff.org/bottledwater/
Only a few weeks after Bottled Water Free Day make sure to keep your community on the wave of action for World Water Day (March 22nd)! On March 22, 2010 the Polaris Institute is proud to release the brand new interactive movie, “The Story of Bottled Water,” in Canada. Co-produced by the Polaris Institute, Corporate Accountability International, Environmental Working Group, Food & Water Watch, The Pacific Institute and the Story of Stuff Project the video tells the tale of bottled water and the movement back to the tap!
“The Story of Bottled Water” is an animated film directed by Annie Leonard, creator of the popular film the “Story of Stuff.”
Show “The Story of Bottled Water” in your community!
· Let us know about your Bottled Water Free Events!
-Register your event here!
-Find out what events are already happening across the country: Click here
-Click here to check out a list of ideas for events you can do in your community!
Find Out More!
Visit www.bottledwaterfreeday.ca and http://www.journeesansbouteilles.ca
Questions? Email: info@bottledwaterfreeday.ca
Join the Bottled Water Free Day Facebook Group
Follow actions on Twitter!
Thanks,
The Polaris Institute InsideTheBottle.org campaign team
Tony, Joe, Richard, Elly, Tanya, Daniel, Cam, Kaitlynn, Nipuni and Fiona
======================
3. CIELAP Sustainability Event with Bob Willard - Toronto - March 31
Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP)
http://www.cielap.org/
Would you like to learn more about sustainability and CIELAP’s future directions? If so, join CIELAP and Bob Willard on Wednesday, March 31 2010 (7:00 to 9:00 pm) for an exclusive evening of insights, networking and light refreshments. All proceeds go to support CIELAP.
Bob Willard is a world-famous expert and thought leader on the business value of corporate sustainability strategies. He has authored three books, the most recent of which is The Sustainability Champion’s Guidebook.
Where: Ogilvy Renault LLP in downtown Toronto (Suite 3800, Royal Bank Plaza, 200 Bay St.)
Cost: Tickets, $50, must be purchased in advance by contacting Kate Skipton at the number or email below.
See complete event details.
Contact:
Kate Skipton
National and International Relationships Co-ordinator
416.923.3529.x.23, kate@cielap.org
===========================
4. Ottawa to rethink uranium rules
QUOTE: "Along with liberalizing the uranium sector, the government said in the Throne Speech that it would "untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates project approvals" in Canada's broader resource sector. The plan is to replace them with "simpler, clearer processes" that would provide "improved environmental protection" and greater certainty to industry"
Ottawa to rethink uranium rules
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/mining/
story.html?id=2639005
Foreign investment
Peter Koven, Financial Post Published: Thursday, March 04, 2010
TORONTO - The federal government has indicated it will liberalize foreign investment rules in Canada's uranium sector, something that the industry supports as long as it comes with the right conditions.
In yesterday's Throne Speech, the government said it will "ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada's uranium mining industry by unduly restricting foreign investment."
Right now, foreign ownership of uranium mining projects in Canada is capped at 49% unless a local partner cannot be found. Other countries have similar or more restrictive rules, many of which date back to Cold War-era concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation.
The government's move to liberalize the rules comes after Red Wilson's competition policy review panel recommended it in 2008. However, the panel said that liberalization should happen only if other countries open their markets as well.
That was a key request from Cameco Corp., the world's biggest uranium miner. Right now, Saskatoon-based Cameco is forbidden from investing in many countries because of foreign investment restrictions. Chief executive Jerry Grandey has said it would be a mistake to change Canada's current policy "without demanding benefits flowing in the other direction."
"We're hopeful that the government supports the principle that if other countries come here to do business, Canada should receive reciprocal benefit in return," said Cameco spokesman Lyle Krahn.
- - - SNIP - - - -
After Cameco, the biggest player in Canada's uranium sector is French nuclear giant AREVA. Needless to say, it is very happy about the government's proposal.
"It's something we've been lobbying and promoting with the government for some time," said Roger Alexander, head of AREVA's Canadian unit.
"We're pleased to see they recognize it is an issue they need to address. It will certainly help us with upcoming projects that we anticipate for the future."
Mr. Alexander made it clear that AREVA will not proceed with large-scale uranium projects in Canada if it has to give up 51% of them due to ownership restrictions. "Unless we can maintain our own projects, we're not going to undertake them," he said.
The government's proposal also got a big thumbs-up from the Canadian Nuclear Association, which said it could greatly improve the competitiveness of the industry.
Along with liberalizing the uranium sector, the government said in the Throne Speech that it would "untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates project approvals" in Canada's broader resource sector. The plan is to replace them with "simpler, clearer processes" that would provide "improved environmental protection" and greater certainty to industry. (Emphasis added. Ed.)
=====================
5. Cameco downgraded on price weakness
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/mining/
story.html?id=2639036
Eric Lam, Financial Post Published: Thursday, March 04, 2010
Even Cameco Corp. (CCO/ TSX), the biggest player in the uranium industry, cannot escape recent weaknesses in the mineral's spot price.
Fraser Phillips, analyst with RBC Capital Markets, has downgraded Cameco to "sector perform" with above-average risk from "outperform," while lowering his price target to $32 from $35, citing declining uranium prices.
Since the beginning of the year, uranium spot prices have dropped $4 a pound, approacing the $40/lb low-water mark of the past four years.
"Notwithstanding the benefits of Cameco's uranium contract portfolio, we forecast a drop in [earnings per share] from $1.49 in 2009 to $1.16 in 2010, and only a modest increase to $1.20 in 2011 based on our revised uranium price forecasts," he said in a new note to clients.
For 2010, Mr. Phillips has dropped his estimated price to $44.50/lb from $50/lb. And for 2011, he now estimates the going rate of uranium to be $55/lb, down from $60/lb.
Continuing work at Cameco's Cigar Lake mine in Saskatchewan and a new report expected in the first quarter of 2010 could serve as upside catalysts for the share price, but Mr. Phillips does not see any major acquisitions in Cameco's pipeline.
He is also still positive on its long term upside, citing Cameco's strong balance sheet and developing free cash flow.
Read more:
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/mining/
story.html?id=2639036#ixzz0hhpYrYJI
=======================
6. S.O.S. – Save Our Saskatchewan celebrated their one year anniversary.
March 3, 2010
S.O.S. formed one year ago as local people within the Lloydminster area came together in a community hall to discuss the proposed nuclear power plant. Average everyday people came together to discuss an issue they felt would affect their community. Over the course of discussions the community became very concerned about nuclear power and wanted to do something about it. The reasons were not all the same (some ranged from economic / debt concerns, health, waste, environment, and that there were already better options that could create more jobs and be more sustainable without the tax payer subsidizing a private company), but the common denominator for everyone was that they did not want this for their community. It didn’t take long for people to decide they wanted to form a group and work together on this issue. S.O.S. was born.
S.O.S. is a non-partisan, grass roots, community group that formed in response to concrete concerns about a nuclear power plant being proposed for the area; their home community of Lloydminster and surrounding rural areas. S.O.S. is one of many groups that form a network across Saskatchewan and Alberta.
The S.O.S. group’s first priority was to get information to the public, and encourage people to look into the issue and become active on the topic. Their main concern was that the public was not being made aware of all the issues of nuclear power. People need to be informed with quality information in order to make decisions, especially the kind that will affect their community and family for generations. Until this point the public was not being involved in this important discussion.
S.O.S. had many events throughout the year to achieve their goal. At their first event on March 9th Mr. Jim Harding spoke to a standing room only crowd where people had the chance to have an open community question and answer period after. S.O.S. held a second event March 23rd with the same success. On April 15th at the RM of Britannia rate payers meeting those in attendance passed a resolution where over 95% voted against a nuclear reactor in the RM of Britannia. S.O.S. participated in the Lloydminster Colonial Days parade with a renewable energy float – placing second in the non-commercial category. In Dan Perrin’s Report on the future of Uranium in Saskatchewan our local area: Lloydminster was 97% opposed to nuclear generation. S.O.S. also participated in the process of the standing committee on crown and central agencies chaired by local MLA Tim McMillan, a renewable energy seminar in North Battleford, and the renewables are doable rally in Saskatoon this past October.
S.O.S. President Aaron Hougham has been overwhelmed with the success of the S.O.S. group: “It amazing what can be accomplished when people work together and have a common goal.” Hougham had many thanks as well: “I would like to genuinely thank the community and all of S.O.S.’s members and supporters for their hard work, dedication, and support this past year”.
The group looks forward to their next year as they will work to educate themselves and the public about the economic and environmental benefits of conservation and renewable energy. Keep an eye out for this progressive group at this year’s Lloydminster Colonial Days as they hope to once again be involved in the parade and hope to sponsor child and youth renewable energy projects in colonial creations. The group also will be looking to hold various conservation and renewable energy events in the future – so keep an eye out!
If anyone is interested in becoming involved or supporting S.O.S. email think37@gmail.com.
=======================
7. Cameco’s Sponsorship Money – schools, public health institutions, etc. - March 9, 2010
As we've seen in Saskatchewan, and Saskatoon in particular, Cameco's sponsorship money is gladly accepted by our schools and public health institutions, to name just two.
I've attached, with permission, an article first published in Saskatchewan's independent news magazine, Briarpatch (http://briarpatchmagazine.com/) back in 1983.
We must understand our present to know where we're going, and this article by Anne Smart lays out the nuclear industry's strategy to co-opt the medical establishment, First Nations communities, women, churches, educators and labour.
With the recent unveiling of the "Cameco Skywalk"
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/fp/
Cameco+Skywalk+officially+opens/2605046/story.html
and the announcement of the Chair in Aboriginal Medicine at Royal University Hospital, the medical establishments' full embrace of the nuclear industry is complete.
For those relatively new to our work, SMDC was the provincially-owned Crown Corporation - the Saskatchewan Mining & Development Corporation – which merged with the Federal Crown Corp Eldorado Nuclear - to form Cameco. The murals in the Cameco Skywalk were painted by 4 young artists from the Saskatoon Youth Arts Program (SCYAP). This group works with "at risk" youth in Saskatoon and has taken money from Cameco before, specifically to host an event honouring the memory of Anne Frank.
As a longtime supporter of SCYAP, I wrote to them at that time, but never received a reply.
Here is a comment from one of our Clean Green email list members:
"Thanks for the latest email regarding nuclear energy. I wanted to make people aware of the recent contribution by Cameco to Royal University Hospital here in Saskatoon.
The RUH foundation website
http://www.ruhf.org/key_donors.php
States: 'Thanks to Cameco Corporation, our lead donor, for donating $1.5 million to the creation of an endowed Chair in Aboriginal Medicine.' Part of the money that RUH has received has gone to upgrading the walkway from the parking lot to the main area of the hospital where the cafeteria, gift shop, elevators, etc can be found. The hallway has some beautiful artwork and some amazing photographs of Saskatoon. At the end of the hallway is a statement about Cameco and its contributions.
I can't remember the entire write-up but the part I do remember is a little sign at the end that says "Cameco. Nuclear. Clean air energy." I intend to write RUH and ask them to remove "Nuclear. Clean air energy." from this walkway.
While it is admirable that Cameco has donated this money to RUH, the slogan is deceptive.
Perhaps, if we didn't have nuclear mining in this province, we would save much more that $1.5 million in health care costs this year and maybe some of the aboriginal health care costs wouldn't be as high.
I think about Barbara Rose Johnston's theory that high levels of radiation in the air may be a possible cause of high rates of diabetes - a significant problem in our aboriginal population. As a cancer survivor who has benefited from the medical isotopes available, and I am grateful for that, I sometimes wonder if I would have been diagnosed with non-hodgekins lymphoma at the age of 36 if we didn't have the sprays, chemicals and uncontrolled mining operations (nuclear being one of them) in our environment.
Nevertheless, I think the logo is very deceptive and I just wanted to make other Cleangreen members aware of this very visible and influential deceptive advertisement .
Thanks."
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Here is the contact information for the Royal University Hospital Foundation:
Phone: 306-655-1984 or
email: ruhfoundation@saskatoonhealthregion.ca.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Read more about Cameco's contributions to "Community Health and Wellness":
http://www.cameco.com/responsibility/community/health/
Thanks
Stephanie
for the Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan
http://www.cleangreensask.ca
cleangreensask@yahoo.ca
========================
8. The nuclear renaissance has begun
http://www.rnw.nl/article/nuclear-renaissance-has-begun
By Thijs Westerbeek Created 8 March 2010 18:17
Published on Radio Netherlands Worldwide (http://www.rnw.nl)
This week, a big international conference takes place in Paris about the sustainable use of nuclear energy. The conference has some important participants: the European Commission, The International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA), and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Nuclear energy is back on the agenda.
A short while ago, President Obama announced that he will make 8.3 billion dollars available for the construction of two new nuclear power plants, Dozens of such plants are being built worldwide at the moment, and many more are in the planning stages.
In the Netherlands too, the building of more nuclear power plants is favoured. There’s currently one active nuclear plant in Borssele that will – contrary to an earlier cabinet decision – remain in production until at least 2033. There are plans for a second power plant in Borssele, and there are also two small plants – one in Delft for research, and one in Petten for medical purposes.
Energy shortage
Remarkably enough, the most important reason for the renewed interest in nuclear energy is not so much the small amount of CO2 that it produces, but rather the expected energy shortage in the coming years, as Jan Leen Kloosterman of the Reactor Institute at the Delft University of Technology, explains:
“I think that is has now become more serious because there’s a great energy problem. Of course there are lots of reactors that will soon be going out of service and must be replaced. At the same time, there’s a steady growth in electricity usage worldwide – estimated to triple within 50 years – so, seen in that light, I expect it will continue.”
The easiest-to-obtain fossil fuel, oil, will inevitably be used up. Some of the alternatives, such as coal, are very dirty. Solutions such as the capturing of the CO2 emissions and placing them in empty gas fields are controversial, and the technical approach is still unproven. In this way, nuclear energy as a low-CO2 form of energy has come back into the picture.
MORE:
http://www.rnw.nl/article/nuclear-renaissance-has-begun
========================
9. How Much Will Obama's Nuclear Blind Spot Cost America?
http://www.alternet.org/story/145947/
By Kate Sheppard, Mother Jones
Posted on March 8, 2010, Printed on March 9, 2010
The Obama administration has embarked on a high-stakes gamble: devoting billions of dollars to an expansion of nuclear power in the hope of winning Republican votes for a climate bill. But in its eagerness to drum up bipartisan support for one of the hardest sells on Obama’s policy agenda, is the administration turning a blind eye to the financial risk?
Obama’s 2009 budget provides $54.4 billion in government-backed loans for new reactors—a long-cherished goal of nuclear advocates and their (mostly Republican) allies in Congress. Environmental and taxpayer protection groups oppose this plan—often citing a damning 2003 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that assessed a similar proposed program and predicted that the loans would have a default rate of "well above 50 percent." The Department of Energy (DOE) argues that this study "is not germane to the current project" and says it has taken steps to avoid the financial pitfalls. But in interviews with Mother Jones, Obama administration officials refused to provide specific figures that would support their claim.
One way to gauge the possibility that a plant might go bust is to look at something called the credit subsidy rate. The term sounds horribly technical, but it's basically DOE jargon for collateral. In order to win Uncle Sam’s backing for an expensive nuclear power plant, a company has to set aside a certain percentage of the loan in a DOE fund. This figure is, in theory, based on the probability that the plant will go belly up. So, the riskier the venture, the more money the company is supposed to throw into the pot. That way, if construction gets delayed or cancelled and the project can't repay its loan on schedule, taxpayers won't be stuck with the entire tab.
The problem? The Obama administration won't disclose the risk involved with any of the proposed reactors it's considering for loan guarantees. Credit subsidy rates are confidential business issues, says Jonathan Silver, head of the DOE's loan guarantee program. Another senior administration official confirms that the subsidy rate is "not a number that's being given out" and is "different for every single project." The official will not even disclose the range of rates assigned to the plants under consideration for the program. Last month, the Obama administration offered the first loan guarantee of $8.3 billion to build two new reactors at the Vogtle plant in Georgia. It won't say how much Southern Company, the utility that owns the plant, will be required to set aside in order to receive the loan—or whether the government has calculated a figure at all.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145947/
==================
10. Revelations from an EDF insider : EPR reactor prone to major nuclear accident risk!
http://www.pej.org/html/
modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=
8106&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
French Nuclear Phaseout Network
Press release - Urgent
The French Network for Nuclear Phase-out (Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire") reveals confidential documents disclosed by an anonymous insider from EDF (Electricité de France, the main French power utility). These documents show that the design of the EPR presents a serious risk of a major nuclear accident - a risk deliberately taken by EDF to increase its profitability. Because it is potentially vulnerable to a situation which could have uncontrollable consequences, the EPR reactor is extremely dangerous.
Download the confidential documents (in French) from :
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/
index.php?menu=actualites&sousmenu=dossiers&soussousmenu=
EPRrevelations&page=index
"Sortir du nucléaire" has set up a group of experts to analyse these recently received documents thoroughly. Here are the first lessons we can learn from them, which are of the utmost importance.
Some operating modes could cause the EPR reactor to explode because of a control rod cluster ejection accident (these control rod clusters moderate the nuclear reaction). These operating modes are mainly related to an objective of economic efficiency, requiring the power of the reactor to adapt to electricity demand. Thus, in order to find a hypothetical economic justification for the EPR, its designers chose to take the very real risk of a major nuclear accident. Moreover, most of the arguments given in favour of the EPR (power, efficiency, waste reduction and safety) have been proved to be false.
EDF and Areva (the leader of the French nuclear industry) have tried to find a solution to the problems related to the operating mode of the reactor: these efforts have failed preventing those kinds of accidents. The French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) has apparently been kept in the dark about these issues.
So the EPR reactor design seems to increase the risk of a Chernobyl-type accident, which would lead to the destruction of the confinement and mass dispersion of radionuclides in the atmosphere.
On March 8th and 9th, Paris hosts an international meeting to encourage 65 countries to acquire nuclear technology. This meeting will be opened by the French President Nicolas Sarkozy and chaired by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano. It is outrageous that France keeps on promoting nuclear power in general and the EPR reactor in particular, as the danger of this reactor has now been demonstrated. The construction of the EPR in Finland, France and China must be stopped immediately, and the planned project in Penly (France) cancelled. The best way to prevent nuclear accidents is indeed to phase out nuclear power and go for renewable energies.
The accident scenario in detail:
According to calculations by EDF and Areva, the reactor’s RIP (Instant Return to Power) control mode and the control rod cluster configuration can induce a rod ejection accident during low-power operation, and lead to the rupture of the control rod drive casing (i). This rupture would cause the coolant to leak outside the nuclear reactor vessel. Such a loss of coolant accident (LOCA - a very serious type of nuclear accident) would damage a large number of fuel rods by heating fuel pellets and claddings (ii), and thus cause the release of highly radioactive steam into the containment. So there is a great risk of a criticality accident resulting in an explosion (iii), the reactor power being increased in an extremely brutal way. Following the ejection of control rod clusters during low-power operation, the reactor emergency shutdown may fail (iv). Whatever the configuration of the control rod clusters, a rod ejection accident induces a high rate of broken fuel rods and therefore a high risk of a criticality accident (v).
For more details, see the documents disclosed by an anonymous EDF source (especially document No. 1) on our website:
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/
index.php?menu=actualites&sousmenu=dossiers&soussousmenu=
EPRrevelations&page=index
Press Contacts:
English-speaking Media: Steven Mitchell, + 33 (0) 9 52 49 50 22
German-speaking Media: Jean-Yvon Landrac, + 33 (0) 6 87 30 41 10
Marc Saint-Aroman, +33 (0) 5 61 35 11 06
Charlotte Mijeon, +33 (0) 6 75 36 20 20
Nuclear physicists: Monique and Raymond Sené, +33 (0) 1 60 10 03 49
Documents to download:
1 - Summary - “Une technologie explosive : l'EPR” (anonymous and undated)
2 - “Bilan de la phase préliminaire de l'étude d'EDG FA3 et perspectives”(EDF SEPTEN May 2009)
3 - “EPR – Gestion combustible – Lot 1 – Revue de conception du schéma de grappes FA3 du 25/10/2007”
4 –“EPR FA3 – Synthèse de l'étude de faisabilité de l'accident d'éjection de grappe” (EDF SEPTEN September 2007)
5 - “EPR FA3- Synthèse des voies de sortie de la problématique éjection de grappe” (EDF SEPTEN July 2007)
6 – Working paper: “Présentation synthétique de l'EPR” (EDF SEPTEN April 2004)
7 - “Note de présentation de la deuxième revue de projet radioprotection EPR” (EDF, Spring 2004)
8 - “Marges disponibles pour les activités d'exploitation du REP par rapport aux risques de criticité” (EDF SEPTEN April 2009)
Notes :
i See. paragraph 6.1.6 Document No. 4
ii Cf. Table 3, Document No. 4
iii See Document n°4, Document n°5 Part 2, « Rapport Préliminaire de Sûreté EPR 15.2.4.e »
iv See Document n°2, note 9
v See Document n°2, note 8.2.1
--
Charlotte Mijeon
International Relations Representative
+ 33 6 75 36 20 20
Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire" / French Nuclear Phaseout Network
Federation gathering 872 NGOs and organizations
www.sortirdunucleaire.org
www.dont-nuke-the-climate.org
www.chernobyl-day.org
=====================
11. AECL to get $300-million boost
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/budget/
aecl-to-get-300-million-boost/article1490400/
?cid=art-rail-budgetnews
Move will help offset commercial losses by stumbling nuclear company
Gloria Galloway
Ottawa — From Friday's Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Mar. 04, 2010
8:57PM EST Last updated on Saturday, Mar. 06, 2010 3:22AM EST
Ottawa will throw $300-million at Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. next year to offset commercial losses and operating costs even as it tries to sell off the problem-plagued nuclear flagship.
The federal government is in the unhappy position of having to plug AECL's many financial holes, although it would much rather have a buyer take the financial sinkhole off its hands. This year alone, AECL cost taxpayers $824-million.
This latest funding is on top of the extra $182-million that the government just plowed into the Crown corporation to cover cost overruns in refurbishment projects and repairs to its isotope-producing National Research Universal reactor at Chalk River, Ont.
In a bout of optimism, the new budget projects that the government will pay almost nothing to keep AECL afloat in fiscal year 2011-12.
There are no plans to unload the research wing of the company, which is responsible for the medical isotope production, even though the NRU been down for repairs since last May and huge costs and potential liabilities lie in its future.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has made it clear he expects Canada to get out of the isotope business when the licence expires in 2016. As a precursor to that exit, the budget released yesterday allocated $48-million in addition to the $300-million over two years to diversify the isotope supply.
But none of the corporation's divisions are profitable.
“AECL's major lines of business are on fire,” said Tom Adams, a consultant with the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario.
“The federal government is in a situation where a lot of AECL's commitments are sunk in an economic sense. ... There is a long list of reasons why AECL has a permanent claim on the taxpayer. There is a level below which AECL's funding cannot drop.”
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/budget/
aecl-to-get-300-million-boost/article1490400/
?cid=art-rail-budgetnews
===============================
12. Exxon Must Pay $1.2 Million for Workers’ Radiation Exposure
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/
news?pid=20601103&sid=alM4ocsiA9PA
By Bob Van Voris and Leslie Snadowsky Last Updated: March 6, 2010 00:01 EST
March 6 (Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp., the largest U.S. energy company, must pay $1.2 million to 16 Louisiana workers who claimed they were exposed to dangerous levels of radiation when they were cleaning used oil drilling pipes, a jury said.
A state court jury in Gretna, Louisiana, yesterday awarded the men amounts ranging from $10,000 to $175,000 each, finding that they face an increased risk of cancer as a result of their exposure to naturally occurring radioactive material in the used pipes between 1977 and 1992.
“It was not what I was hoping for,” said one of the men, David Perry, who was awarded $10,000.
The owners of the property where the men worked won a $1 billion punitive jury verdict against Exxon in 2001 for radioactive contamination from the pipe-cleaning operation. The punitive judgment was reduced to $112 million and paid, with interest, after Exxon’s appeals failed.
The claims are among thousands pending against Exxon and other oil companies over allegations that they put employees and residents near pipe-cleaning operations at risk from radiation- related diseases, particularly cancer.
The verdict comes after Exxon settled several claims in the case by plaintiffs who had developed cancer. None of the 16 men whose claims the jury rejected yesterday suffers from a radiation-related illness.
“We are pleased the jury rejected almost all of the plaintiffs’ claims,” Margaret Ross, a spokeswoman for Exxon Mobil, said in an e-mailed statement. “We remain disappointed that the plaintiffs’ attorneys rejected our standing offer to pay for screening tests that would show the workers have no physical injury.”
MORE: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/
news?pid=20601103&sid=alM4ocsiA9PA
===========================
13. BOOK: The Chernobyl catastrophe and its effects on language, health, politics, and the environment – Hoffman - March 8th, 2010
http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
Dear Readers,
Nearly 24 years later, Chernobyl is still a dirty place, a dirty word.
Chernobyl has almost surely killed hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps already it is more than a million. And over time, it will kill many more. In fact, many estimates are that the vast majority who will be killed or harmed by Chernobyl were not even born at the time of the accident.
This is the legacy denied by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI, the public relations arm of the American nuclear industry) and other nuclear supporters -- including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organization (WHO, which submits all its regulations to the IAEA for approval).
IAEA and WHO admit to a few thousand dead. The NEI claims that only 38, or "under 50" people were killed due to Chernobyl (their exact guess changes now and then, but never by enough). But the truth, like the poisons, seeps out anyway. A new book, Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment, about Chernobyl was recently published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. The book's esteemed authors collected several thousand scientific studies about the after-effects of the Chernobyl meltdown. Until now these studies have never seen the light of day in America, mainly because both America and the countries of the former Soviet Union, as well as all the other nuclear nations of the world, do not want this information "scaring" the public.
It IS scary, but it's worth knowing!
The book, painstakingly edited in English by Dr. Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger, is both shocking and depressing (this author had the honor of co-writing an article with Dr. Sherman in 2009, published in Friends Journal). The book is 335 pages long, and nearly every page has about two dozen studies described briefly (more than 33,000 studies of Chernobyl's effects have been done; they could not all be reviewed or included in the book). It's stupefying. One goes numb. One can't believe the figures (and occasionally, in part due to translation errors from the European mathematical conventions to American notation, the figures undoubtedly ARE wrong). But taken as a group, the evidence is overwhelming.
So many numbers to absorb!
But fear not: The authors have thankfully provided dozens and dozens of graphical charts.
After a while, when you turn to a new page and see a new chart, you can put your finger on "1986" virtually every time (some effects are delayed). Things start to go wrong in dozens of countries: Birth rates go down, perhaps due to people being cautious about having children right after Chernobyl, or perhaps due to unrecorded miscarriages, or both. Age at time of death is down, childhood leukemia is up. The list goes on and on and on.
Chernobyl has killed as many as a hundred times more people than the next-biggest industrial disaster in human history, generally considered to be the mass chemical poisoning in Bhopal, India in 1984. Chernobyl has probably killed more people than the atomic bomb blasts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, including their horrible (and continuing) aftermath.
To this day, the nuclear industry pretends that Chernobyl killed only as many people as might die in a train wreck, or maybe in a bus going over a mountainside. Sad, but nothing substantial.
Chernobyl kills every which way imaginable. But the NEI and other pro-nuclear advocates only count obvious, unmistakable, indisputably-attributable deaths. For every death they acknowledge, their methodologies inevitably miss tens of thousands of deaths that were, in reality, caused by Chernobyl. One could dismiss their estimates out-of-hand as being the work of fools, but the problem with doing that is that a lot of fools believe those estimates.
It's the biggest lie of the 21st Century, since trillions of dollars are being spent based on the idea that nuclear power is "safe" and "clean." In reality, all designs of reactors -- new and old (and old with new names and minor refinements) -- are capable of releasing huge quantities of radioactive isotopes into the environment. Certainly, most designs are different from Chernobyl. But none are perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Perhaps an accident in America is less likely, but there is NO significant evidence of that. There is only evidence that America has been very, very LUCKY not to have experienced a full-blown meltdown yet. (Google Davis-Besse 2002 for one example of a "close call.")
The more reactors we build (if we build ANY more) and the longer we let our old reactors continue to operate, the greater the likelihood that a Chernobyl-size disaster will happen here. Many U.S. reactors are now well beyond their designed-for years of operation, but the old clunkers are kept going by a corrupt regulatory system that refuses to do its job.
And then there is the spent fuel. A catastrophe just as big or BIGGER than Chernobyl could happen in any spent fuel pool, or any dry fuel storage cask, at any time. These imperfect and inadequate storage methods are subject to earthquake or construction failures, as well as terrorists, tornados, tsunamis, even asteroids! No one can rightly claim that our nuclear facilities are secured -- not even against rogue employees. We have built the seeds of our own destruction into our environment. We should be reducing the risk, not increasing it.
But what if we are led to believe that the "disaster" would be minor? What if we are told that wildlife is flourishing in the "exclusion zone" around Chernobyl, now that there are no humans? Would it make us happy? Or would we look for the underlying facts: Birds and other animals can't read signs saying "KEEP OUT!" (in any language). So yes, there is wildlife in the "exclusion zone," but there is strong evidence that many of the creatures are dying when they get there. They don't reproduce properly, and more birds and animals from the nearby, less-contaminated areas come in to replace them, and this just keeps on happening. Migratory species pass through, eat Chernobyl's plants and animals, which are often highly irradiated, and then leave their droppings (or die) elsewhere, in a continuous, deadly, but gradual cycle.
Chernobyl had a poor design. The operators were running unauthorized experiments without proper safety equipment ready. There was no containment dome. Well, that had plusses, actually. In fact, it saved the day in some sense, since they were able to pour sand, lead, and other materials directly onto the hot reactor from helicopters flying overhead, through the invisible radioactive plume. Otherwise, the reactor might have burnt completely. As it was, "only" about 3 to 5% of the reactor core was dispersed into the environment. The rest sits there to this day, still hot thermally and radioactively, still seeping nuclear poisons into the ecosystem, untouched for the most part. Covered once with a poorly-built concrete sarcophagus, it is soon to be covered again. Right now, water gets in, and then radioactive crud oozes out. Radioactive gasses seep constantly from the numerous cracks in the "vault".
What once were some of the richest agricultural areas in the world are now foraged by scavengers: Poor, uneducated people who drift into the "exclusion zone" that surrounds the plant, where only authorized people taking proper protective measures are supposed to go.
Chernobyl's pollution is still spreading. The soil holds the cesium and the strontium and other radioactive elements, until years of rain bring them down to the roots of deep-root trees, which take them up to the surface again. Then a wildfire burns those trees, and a cloud of radioactive crud is wafted onto some other community downwind from Chernobyl. Of course the dose will be lower, but the damage will be more widespread.
Currently, most of the radiation doses that the residents of the contaminated regions are receiving are from the food they eat and the water they drink (mostly the food), not the air they breath (although that too is poisoned).
Chernobyl changed the definitions of words and gave us many new phrases which the book discusses.
Perhaps the most well-known new term is: "Children of Chernobyl."
Each year, a few hundred young children, usually with thyroid problems but always with health problems, are brought to "healthy" environments such as Southern California, USA (where this author lives and got bladder cancer a few years ago). There is always a lot of media publicity about the children, which is good for the organizers, fun for the children, and useful for the public, who are thus reminded each year of the horrible events that occurred in Chernobyl 24 years ago next month. The downside is that the public is led to believe that helping these few means the problem is being properly handled. There is, for the most part, no assistance for most of the millions who have been harmed.
Normally, and thankfully, only a small fraction of children are born with health problems. In areas that were heavily contaminated by Chernobyl's invisible poisons (invisible, but relatively easy to measure IF you have the money, the time, and the equipment), 80% of the children are born with health problems. In very heavily contaminated areas, 98% are not healthy. One of the "solutions" recommended in the book -- presumably out of desperation -- is better testing of fetuses, and abortions if the findings are severe enough.
Another new term that came out of Chernobyl is: "Liquidators." Liquidators are the people who went into the reactor to put out the fire, or flew over it -- people who put their lives on the line to save their families, their country, and our environment. There were over 800,000 liquidators. Now they are dying in droves, dying early, of cancer, heart disease, leukemia, and a general degradation of their body organs. (That's what radiation does at the very least: It ages you.)
Another new term that came out of Chernobyl is "Chernobyl AIDS." One of the main ways that radiation damages the body is that it weakens the immune system, leading to death from infectious diseases that the person might have otherwise survived.
"Chernobyl babies" are children who have serious malformations such as organs outside their bodies, shortened limbs, or no brain (only a brain stem, so they breath, but can never think). Some have essentially no bones -- they are called "jellyfish children" and the only other place they have been seen was on the Marshall Islands after nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s. The children of liquidators are especially likely to be "Chernobyl babies."
What a thing to look forward to if YOUR nuclear power plant melts down, or if its spent fuel burns up, or if some other catastrophe causes another massive spill! Or if your local nuclear power plant just leaks too much tritium, like so many do.
If you live in the northern hemisphere (as most of us do), Chernobyl is blamed for about 2% of what is now called your "natural background radiation." But one should not be too encouraged to hear that it is "only" 2%. For one thing, it is reasonable to believe that the background radiation, which is unavoidable, is also the root cause of many cancers which have no other obvious cause. Second, the actual value for some places may be much higher than the "average" for the whole planet (or a little lower). There are millions of hectares of farmland which still have significantly higher radiation levels as a result of Chernobyl.
Monitoring what is being fed to people who already live in contaminated zones is one of the most important tools for protecting them from the damages of radiation. Needless to say, it's expensive and is rarely done. Another problem is that companies which know they are "over the limit" with some of their supplies mix the contaminated food with less radioactive food so the average dose is legally permissible. But the same amount of radionuclides are being dispersed into the population. It's an inexcusable crime that happens all the time.
More new phrases and meanings:
The "Red Forest" is the area immediately surrounding Chernobyl -- hundreds of square miles -- where the trees have turned color for some unknown reason.
The "Chernobyl effect" is an increased thyroid cancer rate. There is also an increased mortality rate if you do get the disease than in the less contaminated regions of the world (perhaps because your entire body is already degraded by the radioactive poisons).
We all are degraded by Chernobyl. Chernobyl's radioactive isotopes continue to invade us all. The general term for what Chernobyl has done is "geobotanical catastrophe."
Like the "Children of Chernobyl," "Physicians of Chernobyl," "Widows of Chernobyl" and "Liquidators Unions" are large groups of people who have been adversely affected by the tragedy.
"Chernobyl limbs" are deformities of the arms and/or legs, more common in the more contaminated zones.
"Chernobyl heart" is a malformed heart the does not do its job properly.
"Radiation in utero" is the poisoning of a fetus in the womb, also an ongoing problem.
Other new medical terms arising from the Chernobyl disaster include "vegetovascular dystonia," a nervous system breakdown, "incorporated long-life radionuclides," and "acute inhalation lesions of the upper respiratory tract" which are mainly seen in liquidators, and include a combination of: "rhinitis, throat tickling, dry cough, difficulty breathing, and shortness of breath, owing to the effect of inhaled radionuclides, including 'hot particles'."
Chernobyl illnesses are no fun. "Typical complaints from liquidators" include: "severe headaches, not relieved by medication, impaired memory of current events, general weakness, fatigue, diminished capacity for work, generalized sweating, palpitations, bone and joint pains and aches that interfere with their sleep, sporadic loss of consciousness, sensation of fever or heat, difficulty in thinking, heart seizures, flashes, loss of vision, and numbness in hands and feet."
Chernobyl's tendrils of poison have only begun to spread. Inadequate containment measures ensure that more of the original reactor core will leak out of the site, into the environment, and into our bodies. Chernobyl's radiation has damaged hundreds of millions of people, if not billions, and continues to do so.
The truth about the Chernobyl catastrophe is being systematically hidden from the people, especially in every country with nuclear power, by their governments and by their nuclear industries. It is good to read the truth, but it hardly feels like a breath of fresh air.
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA
- - - - -
Hoffman is an educational software developer and the author of The Code Killers, a technical guide to the nuclear industry. The Code Killers is available as a free download from the author's web site: www.acehoffman.org .
To obtain a copy of Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment (unfortunately, the cost is ~$150!):
http://www.nyas.org/Publications/Annals/
Detail.aspx?cid=f3f3bd16-51ba-4d7b-a086-753f44b3bfc1
Written by Alexey V. Yablokov (Center for Russian Environmental Policy, Moscow, Russia), Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko (Institute of Radiation Safety, Minsk, Belarus). Consulting Editor Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger (Environmental Institute, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan).
Volume 1181, December 2009, 335 Pages
Ralph Nader: No Nukes (includes comments about the book):
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/13
Karl Grossman talks about the book (a more complete review from Karl will be forthcoming):
http://www.counterpunch.org/grossman02172010.html
-----------------------------------------
Ace Hoffman
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
phone: (800) 551-2726; (760) 720-7261
address: PO Box 1936, Carlsbad, CA 92018
Subscribe to my free newsletter today!
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
=========================
14. The Climate Change Propaganda War Is Just Getting Started
http://www.disinfo.com/2010/03/
the-climate-change-propaganda-war-is-just-getting-start/
Posted by majestic on March 7, 2010
Climate change … always entertaining. From the Washington Times:
Undaunted by a rash of scandals over the science underpinning climate change, top climate researchers are plotting to respond with what one scientist involved said needs to be “an outlandishly aggressively partisan approach” to gut the credibility of skeptics.
In private e-mails obtained by The Washington Times, climate scientists at the National Academy of Sciences say they are tired of “being treated like political pawns” and need to fight back in kind. Their strategy includes forming a nonprofit group to organize researchers and use their donations to challenge critics by running a back-page ad in the New York Times.
“Most of our colleagues don’t seem to grasp that we’re not in a gentlepersons’ debate, we’re in a street fight against well-funded, merciless enemies who play by entirely different rules,” Paul R. Ehrlich, a Stanford University researcher, said in one of the e-mails.
Some scientists question the tactic and say they should focus instead on perfecting their science, but the researchers who are organizing the effort say the political battle is eroding confidence in their work.
“This was an outpouring of angry frustration on the part of normally very staid scientists who said, ‘God, can’t we have a civil dialogue here and discuss the truth without spinning everything,’” said Stephen H. Schneider, a Stanford professor and senior fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment who was part of the e-mail discussion but wants the scientists to take a slightly different approach.
The scientists have been under siege since late last year when e-mails leaked from a British climate research institute seemed to show top researchers talking about skewing data to push predetermined outcomes. Meanwhile, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative body on the matter, has suffered defections of members after it had to retract claims that Himalayan glaciers will melt over the next 25 years.
Last month, President Obama announced that he would create a U.S. agency to arbitrate research on climate change.
Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican and a chief skeptic of global-warming claims, is considering asking the Justice Department to investigate whether climate scientists who receive taxpayer-funded grants falsified data. He lists 17 people he said have been key players in the controversy.
That news has enraged scientists…
MORE:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/05/
scientists-plot-to-hit-back-at-critics/
Compilation:
1. EVENT: Morality, Nuclear Power, and Resistance: Environmental Activism in Saskatchewan, 2009 – Saskatoon - March 16, 2010
2. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
3. CIELAP Sustainability Event with Bob Willard - Toronto - March 31
4. Ottawa to rethink uranium rules
5. Cameco downgraded on price weakness
6. S.O.S. – Save Our Saskatchewan celebrated their one year anniversary.
7. Cameco’s Sponsorship Money – schools, public health institutions, etc. - March 9, 2010
8. The nuclear renaissance has begun
9. How Much Will Obama's Nuclear Blind Spot Cost America?
10. Revelations from an EDF insider: EPR reactor prone to major nuclear accident risk!
11. AECL to get $300-million boost
12. Exxon Must Pay $1.2 Million for Workers’ Radiation Exposure
13. BOOK: The Chernobyl catastrophe and its effects on language, health, politics, and the environment – Hoffman - March 8th, 2010
14. The Climate Change Propaganda War Is Just Getting Started
=========================
1. EVENT: Morality, Nuclear Power, and Resistance: Environmental Activism in Saskatchewan, 2009 – Saskatoon - March 16, 2010
SPEAKER: Alexander (Sandy) Ervin, Ph.D., Professor, University of Saskatchewan
WHERE: ARTS BLDG. Rm 134, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon
WHEN: Tuesday, March 16, 4:00 pm
Everyone welcome. Event is free. Discussion to follow.
Alexander (Sandy) Ervin’s current interests and research include political ecology, social movements, and the interplay of society and energy, as well as continued activities through applied anthropology and community-based engagement.
He is currently writing a book on cultural change and globalization, a synthesis of anthropology’s legacy and current
contributions.
*Colloquium Series*
Dept. of Religion and Culture
College of Arts and Science
=========================
2. Bottled Water Free Day Bulletin: March 11, 2010
www.bottledwaterfreeday.ca
With only 4 days to go until Canada’s first Bottled Water Free Day on March 11th, there is momentum across the country. Every day more and more individuals, schools, municipalities, environmental organizations and unions are signing the pledge!
“The Story of Bottled Water” – Watch the Trailer: http://storyofstuff.org/bottledwater/
Only a few weeks after Bottled Water Free Day make sure to keep your community on the wave of action for World Water Day (March 22nd)! On March 22, 2010 the Polaris Institute is proud to release the brand new interactive movie, “The Story of Bottled Water,” in Canada. Co-produced by the Polaris Institute, Corporate Accountability International, Environmental Working Group, Food & Water Watch, The Pacific Institute and the Story of Stuff Project the video tells the tale of bottled water and the movement back to the tap!
“The Story of Bottled Water” is an animated film directed by Annie Leonard, creator of the popular film the “Story of Stuff.”
Show “The Story of Bottled Water” in your community!
· Let us know about your Bottled Water Free Events!
-Register your event here!
-Find out what events are already happening across the country: Click here
-Click here to check out a list of ideas for events you can do in your community!
Find Out More!
Visit www.bottledwaterfreeday.ca and http://www.journeesansbouteilles.ca
Questions? Email: info@bottledwaterfreeday.ca
Join the Bottled Water Free Day Facebook Group
Follow actions on Twitter!
Thanks,
The Polaris Institute InsideTheBottle.org campaign team
Tony, Joe, Richard, Elly, Tanya, Daniel, Cam, Kaitlynn, Nipuni and Fiona
======================
3. CIELAP Sustainability Event with Bob Willard - Toronto - March 31
Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP)
http://www.cielap.org/
Would you like to learn more about sustainability and CIELAP’s future directions? If so, join CIELAP and Bob Willard on Wednesday, March 31 2010 (7:00 to 9:00 pm) for an exclusive evening of insights, networking and light refreshments. All proceeds go to support CIELAP.
Bob Willard is a world-famous expert and thought leader on the business value of corporate sustainability strategies. He has authored three books, the most recent of which is The Sustainability Champion’s Guidebook.
Where: Ogilvy Renault LLP in downtown Toronto (Suite 3800, Royal Bank Plaza, 200 Bay St.)
Cost: Tickets, $50, must be purchased in advance by contacting Kate Skipton at the number or email below.
See complete event details.
Contact:
Kate Skipton
National and International Relationships Co-ordinator
416.923.3529.x.23, kate@cielap.org
===========================
4. Ottawa to rethink uranium rules
QUOTE: "Along with liberalizing the uranium sector, the government said in the Throne Speech that it would "untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates project approvals" in Canada's broader resource sector. The plan is to replace them with "simpler, clearer processes" that would provide "improved environmental protection" and greater certainty to industry"
Ottawa to rethink uranium rules
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/mining/
story.html?id=2639005
Foreign investment
Peter Koven, Financial Post Published: Thursday, March 04, 2010
TORONTO - The federal government has indicated it will liberalize foreign investment rules in Canada's uranium sector, something that the industry supports as long as it comes with the right conditions.
In yesterday's Throne Speech, the government said it will "ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada's uranium mining industry by unduly restricting foreign investment."
Right now, foreign ownership of uranium mining projects in Canada is capped at 49% unless a local partner cannot be found. Other countries have similar or more restrictive rules, many of which date back to Cold War-era concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation.
The government's move to liberalize the rules comes after Red Wilson's competition policy review panel recommended it in 2008. However, the panel said that liberalization should happen only if other countries open their markets as well.
That was a key request from Cameco Corp., the world's biggest uranium miner. Right now, Saskatoon-based Cameco is forbidden from investing in many countries because of foreign investment restrictions. Chief executive Jerry Grandey has said it would be a mistake to change Canada's current policy "without demanding benefits flowing in the other direction."
"We're hopeful that the government supports the principle that if other countries come here to do business, Canada should receive reciprocal benefit in return," said Cameco spokesman Lyle Krahn.
- - - SNIP - - - -
After Cameco, the biggest player in Canada's uranium sector is French nuclear giant AREVA. Needless to say, it is very happy about the government's proposal.
"It's something we've been lobbying and promoting with the government for some time," said Roger Alexander, head of AREVA's Canadian unit.
"We're pleased to see they recognize it is an issue they need to address. It will certainly help us with upcoming projects that we anticipate for the future."
Mr. Alexander made it clear that AREVA will not proceed with large-scale uranium projects in Canada if it has to give up 51% of them due to ownership restrictions. "Unless we can maintain our own projects, we're not going to undertake them," he said.
The government's proposal also got a big thumbs-up from the Canadian Nuclear Association, which said it could greatly improve the competitiveness of the industry.
Along with liberalizing the uranium sector, the government said in the Throne Speech that it would "untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates project approvals" in Canada's broader resource sector. The plan is to replace them with "simpler, clearer processes" that would provide "improved environmental protection" and greater certainty to industry. (Emphasis added. Ed.)
=====================
5. Cameco downgraded on price weakness
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/mining/
story.html?id=2639036
Eric Lam, Financial Post Published: Thursday, March 04, 2010
Even Cameco Corp. (CCO/ TSX), the biggest player in the uranium industry, cannot escape recent weaknesses in the mineral's spot price.
Fraser Phillips, analyst with RBC Capital Markets, has downgraded Cameco to "sector perform" with above-average risk from "outperform," while lowering his price target to $32 from $35, citing declining uranium prices.
Since the beginning of the year, uranium spot prices have dropped $4 a pound, approacing the $40/lb low-water mark of the past four years.
"Notwithstanding the benefits of Cameco's uranium contract portfolio, we forecast a drop in [earnings per share] from $1.49 in 2009 to $1.16 in 2010, and only a modest increase to $1.20 in 2011 based on our revised uranium price forecasts," he said in a new note to clients.
For 2010, Mr. Phillips has dropped his estimated price to $44.50/lb from $50/lb. And for 2011, he now estimates the going rate of uranium to be $55/lb, down from $60/lb.
Continuing work at Cameco's Cigar Lake mine in Saskatchewan and a new report expected in the first quarter of 2010 could serve as upside catalysts for the share price, but Mr. Phillips does not see any major acquisitions in Cameco's pipeline.
He is also still positive on its long term upside, citing Cameco's strong balance sheet and developing free cash flow.
Read more:
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/mining/
story.html?id=2639036#ixzz0hhpYrYJI
=======================
6. S.O.S. – Save Our Saskatchewan celebrated their one year anniversary.
March 3, 2010
S.O.S. formed one year ago as local people within the Lloydminster area came together in a community hall to discuss the proposed nuclear power plant. Average everyday people came together to discuss an issue they felt would affect their community. Over the course of discussions the community became very concerned about nuclear power and wanted to do something about it. The reasons were not all the same (some ranged from economic / debt concerns, health, waste, environment, and that there were already better options that could create more jobs and be more sustainable without the tax payer subsidizing a private company), but the common denominator for everyone was that they did not want this for their community. It didn’t take long for people to decide they wanted to form a group and work together on this issue. S.O.S. was born.
S.O.S. is a non-partisan, grass roots, community group that formed in response to concrete concerns about a nuclear power plant being proposed for the area; their home community of Lloydminster and surrounding rural areas. S.O.S. is one of many groups that form a network across Saskatchewan and Alberta.
The S.O.S. group’s first priority was to get information to the public, and encourage people to look into the issue and become active on the topic. Their main concern was that the public was not being made aware of all the issues of nuclear power. People need to be informed with quality information in order to make decisions, especially the kind that will affect their community and family for generations. Until this point the public was not being involved in this important discussion.
S.O.S. had many events throughout the year to achieve their goal. At their first event on March 9th Mr. Jim Harding spoke to a standing room only crowd where people had the chance to have an open community question and answer period after. S.O.S. held a second event March 23rd with the same success. On April 15th at the RM of Britannia rate payers meeting those in attendance passed a resolution where over 95% voted against a nuclear reactor in the RM of Britannia. S.O.S. participated in the Lloydminster Colonial Days parade with a renewable energy float – placing second in the non-commercial category. In Dan Perrin’s Report on the future of Uranium in Saskatchewan our local area: Lloydminster was 97% opposed to nuclear generation. S.O.S. also participated in the process of the standing committee on crown and central agencies chaired by local MLA Tim McMillan, a renewable energy seminar in North Battleford, and the renewables are doable rally in Saskatoon this past October.
S.O.S. President Aaron Hougham has been overwhelmed with the success of the S.O.S. group: “It amazing what can be accomplished when people work together and have a common goal.” Hougham had many thanks as well: “I would like to genuinely thank the community and all of S.O.S.’s members and supporters for their hard work, dedication, and support this past year”.
The group looks forward to their next year as they will work to educate themselves and the public about the economic and environmental benefits of conservation and renewable energy. Keep an eye out for this progressive group at this year’s Lloydminster Colonial Days as they hope to once again be involved in the parade and hope to sponsor child and youth renewable energy projects in colonial creations. The group also will be looking to hold various conservation and renewable energy events in the future – so keep an eye out!
If anyone is interested in becoming involved or supporting S.O.S. email think37@gmail.com.
=======================
7. Cameco’s Sponsorship Money – schools, public health institutions, etc. - March 9, 2010
As we've seen in Saskatchewan, and Saskatoon in particular, Cameco's sponsorship money is gladly accepted by our schools and public health institutions, to name just two.
I've attached, with permission, an article first published in Saskatchewan's independent news magazine, Briarpatch (http://briarpatchmagazine.com/) back in 1983.
We must understand our present to know where we're going, and this article by Anne Smart lays out the nuclear industry's strategy to co-opt the medical establishment, First Nations communities, women, churches, educators and labour.
With the recent unveiling of the "Cameco Skywalk"
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/fp/
Cameco+Skywalk+officially+opens/2605046/story.html
and the announcement of the Chair in Aboriginal Medicine at Royal University Hospital, the medical establishments' full embrace of the nuclear industry is complete.
For those relatively new to our work, SMDC was the provincially-owned Crown Corporation - the Saskatchewan Mining & Development Corporation – which merged with the Federal Crown Corp Eldorado Nuclear - to form Cameco. The murals in the Cameco Skywalk were painted by 4 young artists from the Saskatoon Youth Arts Program (SCYAP). This group works with "at risk" youth in Saskatoon and has taken money from Cameco before, specifically to host an event honouring the memory of Anne Frank.
As a longtime supporter of SCYAP, I wrote to them at that time, but never received a reply.
Here is a comment from one of our Clean Green email list members:
"Thanks for the latest email regarding nuclear energy. I wanted to make people aware of the recent contribution by Cameco to Royal University Hospital here in Saskatoon.
The RUH foundation website
http://www.ruhf.org/key_donors.php
States: 'Thanks to Cameco Corporation, our lead donor, for donating $1.5 million to the creation of an endowed Chair in Aboriginal Medicine.' Part of the money that RUH has received has gone to upgrading the walkway from the parking lot to the main area of the hospital where the cafeteria, gift shop, elevators, etc can be found. The hallway has some beautiful artwork and some amazing photographs of Saskatoon. At the end of the hallway is a statement about Cameco and its contributions.
I can't remember the entire write-up but the part I do remember is a little sign at the end that says "Cameco. Nuclear. Clean air energy." I intend to write RUH and ask them to remove "Nuclear. Clean air energy." from this walkway.
While it is admirable that Cameco has donated this money to RUH, the slogan is deceptive.
Perhaps, if we didn't have nuclear mining in this province, we would save much more that $1.5 million in health care costs this year and maybe some of the aboriginal health care costs wouldn't be as high.
I think about Barbara Rose Johnston's theory that high levels of radiation in the air may be a possible cause of high rates of diabetes - a significant problem in our aboriginal population. As a cancer survivor who has benefited from the medical isotopes available, and I am grateful for that, I sometimes wonder if I would have been diagnosed with non-hodgekins lymphoma at the age of 36 if we didn't have the sprays, chemicals and uncontrolled mining operations (nuclear being one of them) in our environment.
Nevertheless, I think the logo is very deceptive and I just wanted to make other Cleangreen members aware of this very visible and influential deceptive advertisement .
Thanks."
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Here is the contact information for the Royal University Hospital Foundation:
Phone: 306-655-1984 or
email: ruhfoundation@saskatoonhealthregion.ca.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Read more about Cameco's contributions to "Community Health and Wellness":
http://www.cameco.com/responsibility/community/health/
Thanks
Stephanie
for the Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan
http://www.cleangreensask.ca
cleangreensask@yahoo.ca
========================
8. The nuclear renaissance has begun
http://www.rnw.nl/article/nuclear-renaissance-has-begun
By Thijs Westerbeek Created 8 March 2010 18:17
Published on Radio Netherlands Worldwide (http://www.rnw.nl)
This week, a big international conference takes place in Paris about the sustainable use of nuclear energy. The conference has some important participants: the European Commission, The International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA), and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Nuclear energy is back on the agenda.
A short while ago, President Obama announced that he will make 8.3 billion dollars available for the construction of two new nuclear power plants, Dozens of such plants are being built worldwide at the moment, and many more are in the planning stages.
In the Netherlands too, the building of more nuclear power plants is favoured. There’s currently one active nuclear plant in Borssele that will – contrary to an earlier cabinet decision – remain in production until at least 2033. There are plans for a second power plant in Borssele, and there are also two small plants – one in Delft for research, and one in Petten for medical purposes.
Energy shortage
Remarkably enough, the most important reason for the renewed interest in nuclear energy is not so much the small amount of CO2 that it produces, but rather the expected energy shortage in the coming years, as Jan Leen Kloosterman of the Reactor Institute at the Delft University of Technology, explains:
“I think that is has now become more serious because there’s a great energy problem. Of course there are lots of reactors that will soon be going out of service and must be replaced. At the same time, there’s a steady growth in electricity usage worldwide – estimated to triple within 50 years – so, seen in that light, I expect it will continue.”
The easiest-to-obtain fossil fuel, oil, will inevitably be used up. Some of the alternatives, such as coal, are very dirty. Solutions such as the capturing of the CO2 emissions and placing them in empty gas fields are controversial, and the technical approach is still unproven. In this way, nuclear energy as a low-CO2 form of energy has come back into the picture.
MORE:
http://www.rnw.nl/article/nuclear-renaissance-has-begun
========================
9. How Much Will Obama's Nuclear Blind Spot Cost America?
http://www.alternet.org/story/145947/
By Kate Sheppard, Mother Jones
Posted on March 8, 2010, Printed on March 9, 2010
The Obama administration has embarked on a high-stakes gamble: devoting billions of dollars to an expansion of nuclear power in the hope of winning Republican votes for a climate bill. But in its eagerness to drum up bipartisan support for one of the hardest sells on Obama’s policy agenda, is the administration turning a blind eye to the financial risk?
Obama’s 2009 budget provides $54.4 billion in government-backed loans for new reactors—a long-cherished goal of nuclear advocates and their (mostly Republican) allies in Congress. Environmental and taxpayer protection groups oppose this plan—often citing a damning 2003 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that assessed a similar proposed program and predicted that the loans would have a default rate of "well above 50 percent." The Department of Energy (DOE) argues that this study "is not germane to the current project" and says it has taken steps to avoid the financial pitfalls. But in interviews with Mother Jones, Obama administration officials refused to provide specific figures that would support their claim.
One way to gauge the possibility that a plant might go bust is to look at something called the credit subsidy rate. The term sounds horribly technical, but it's basically DOE jargon for collateral. In order to win Uncle Sam’s backing for an expensive nuclear power plant, a company has to set aside a certain percentage of the loan in a DOE fund. This figure is, in theory, based on the probability that the plant will go belly up. So, the riskier the venture, the more money the company is supposed to throw into the pot. That way, if construction gets delayed or cancelled and the project can't repay its loan on schedule, taxpayers won't be stuck with the entire tab.
The problem? The Obama administration won't disclose the risk involved with any of the proposed reactors it's considering for loan guarantees. Credit subsidy rates are confidential business issues, says Jonathan Silver, head of the DOE's loan guarantee program. Another senior administration official confirms that the subsidy rate is "not a number that's being given out" and is "different for every single project." The official will not even disclose the range of rates assigned to the plants under consideration for the program. Last month, the Obama administration offered the first loan guarantee of $8.3 billion to build two new reactors at the Vogtle plant in Georgia. It won't say how much Southern Company, the utility that owns the plant, will be required to set aside in order to receive the loan—or whether the government has calculated a figure at all.
MORE: http://www.alternet.org/story/145947/
==================
10. Revelations from an EDF insider : EPR reactor prone to major nuclear accident risk!
http://www.pej.org/html/
modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=
8106&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
French Nuclear Phaseout Network
Press release - Urgent
The French Network for Nuclear Phase-out (Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire") reveals confidential documents disclosed by an anonymous insider from EDF (Electricité de France, the main French power utility). These documents show that the design of the EPR presents a serious risk of a major nuclear accident - a risk deliberately taken by EDF to increase its profitability. Because it is potentially vulnerable to a situation which could have uncontrollable consequences, the EPR reactor is extremely dangerous.
Download the confidential documents (in French) from :
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/
index.php?menu=actualites&sousmenu=dossiers&soussousmenu=
EPRrevelations&page=index
"Sortir du nucléaire" has set up a group of experts to analyse these recently received documents thoroughly. Here are the first lessons we can learn from them, which are of the utmost importance.
Some operating modes could cause the EPR reactor to explode because of a control rod cluster ejection accident (these control rod clusters moderate the nuclear reaction). These operating modes are mainly related to an objective of economic efficiency, requiring the power of the reactor to adapt to electricity demand. Thus, in order to find a hypothetical economic justification for the EPR, its designers chose to take the very real risk of a major nuclear accident. Moreover, most of the arguments given in favour of the EPR (power, efficiency, waste reduction and safety) have been proved to be false.
EDF and Areva (the leader of the French nuclear industry) have tried to find a solution to the problems related to the operating mode of the reactor: these efforts have failed preventing those kinds of accidents. The French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) has apparently been kept in the dark about these issues.
So the EPR reactor design seems to increase the risk of a Chernobyl-type accident, which would lead to the destruction of the confinement and mass dispersion of radionuclides in the atmosphere.
On March 8th and 9th, Paris hosts an international meeting to encourage 65 countries to acquire nuclear technology. This meeting will be opened by the French President Nicolas Sarkozy and chaired by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano. It is outrageous that France keeps on promoting nuclear power in general and the EPR reactor in particular, as the danger of this reactor has now been demonstrated. The construction of the EPR in Finland, France and China must be stopped immediately, and the planned project in Penly (France) cancelled. The best way to prevent nuclear accidents is indeed to phase out nuclear power and go for renewable energies.
The accident scenario in detail:
According to calculations by EDF and Areva, the reactor’s RIP (Instant Return to Power) control mode and the control rod cluster configuration can induce a rod ejection accident during low-power operation, and lead to the rupture of the control rod drive casing (i). This rupture would cause the coolant to leak outside the nuclear reactor vessel. Such a loss of coolant accident (LOCA - a very serious type of nuclear accident) would damage a large number of fuel rods by heating fuel pellets and claddings (ii), and thus cause the release of highly radioactive steam into the containment. So there is a great risk of a criticality accident resulting in an explosion (iii), the reactor power being increased in an extremely brutal way. Following the ejection of control rod clusters during low-power operation, the reactor emergency shutdown may fail (iv). Whatever the configuration of the control rod clusters, a rod ejection accident induces a high rate of broken fuel rods and therefore a high risk of a criticality accident (v).
For more details, see the documents disclosed by an anonymous EDF source (especially document No. 1) on our website:
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/
index.php?menu=actualites&sousmenu=dossiers&soussousmenu=
EPRrevelations&page=index
Press Contacts:
English-speaking Media: Steven Mitchell, + 33 (0) 9 52 49 50 22
German-speaking Media: Jean-Yvon Landrac, + 33 (0) 6 87 30 41 10
Marc Saint-Aroman, +33 (0) 5 61 35 11 06
Charlotte Mijeon, +33 (0) 6 75 36 20 20
Nuclear physicists: Monique and Raymond Sené, +33 (0) 1 60 10 03 49
Documents to download:
1 - Summary - “Une technologie explosive : l'EPR” (anonymous and undated)
2 - “Bilan de la phase préliminaire de l'étude d'EDG FA3 et perspectives”(EDF SEPTEN May 2009)
3 - “EPR – Gestion combustible – Lot 1 – Revue de conception du schéma de grappes FA3 du 25/10/2007”
4 –“EPR FA3 – Synthèse de l'étude de faisabilité de l'accident d'éjection de grappe” (EDF SEPTEN September 2007)
5 - “EPR FA3- Synthèse des voies de sortie de la problématique éjection de grappe” (EDF SEPTEN July 2007)
6 – Working paper: “Présentation synthétique de l'EPR” (EDF SEPTEN April 2004)
7 - “Note de présentation de la deuxième revue de projet radioprotection EPR” (EDF, Spring 2004)
8 - “Marges disponibles pour les activités d'exploitation du REP par rapport aux risques de criticité” (EDF SEPTEN April 2009)
Notes :
i See. paragraph 6.1.6 Document No. 4
ii Cf. Table 3, Document No. 4
iii See Document n°4, Document n°5 Part 2, « Rapport Préliminaire de Sûreté EPR 15.2.4.e »
iv See Document n°2, note 9
v See Document n°2, note 8.2.1
--
Charlotte Mijeon
International Relations Representative
+ 33 6 75 36 20 20
Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire" / French Nuclear Phaseout Network
Federation gathering 872 NGOs and organizations
www.sortirdunucleaire.org
www.dont-nuke-the-climate.org
www.chernobyl-day.org
=====================
11. AECL to get $300-million boost
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/budget/
aecl-to-get-300-million-boost/article1490400/
?cid=art-rail-budgetnews
Move will help offset commercial losses by stumbling nuclear company
Gloria Galloway
Ottawa — From Friday's Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Mar. 04, 2010
8:57PM EST Last updated on Saturday, Mar. 06, 2010 3:22AM EST
Ottawa will throw $300-million at Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. next year to offset commercial losses and operating costs even as it tries to sell off the problem-plagued nuclear flagship.
The federal government is in the unhappy position of having to plug AECL's many financial holes, although it would much rather have a buyer take the financial sinkhole off its hands. This year alone, AECL cost taxpayers $824-million.
This latest funding is on top of the extra $182-million that the government just plowed into the Crown corporation to cover cost overruns in refurbishment projects and repairs to its isotope-producing National Research Universal reactor at Chalk River, Ont.
In a bout of optimism, the new budget projects that the government will pay almost nothing to keep AECL afloat in fiscal year 2011-12.
There are no plans to unload the research wing of the company, which is responsible for the medical isotope production, even though the NRU been down for repairs since last May and huge costs and potential liabilities lie in its future.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has made it clear he expects Canada to get out of the isotope business when the licence expires in 2016. As a precursor to that exit, the budget released yesterday allocated $48-million in addition to the $300-million over two years to diversify the isotope supply.
But none of the corporation's divisions are profitable.
“AECL's major lines of business are on fire,” said Tom Adams, a consultant with the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario.
“The federal government is in a situation where a lot of AECL's commitments are sunk in an economic sense. ... There is a long list of reasons why AECL has a permanent claim on the taxpayer. There is a level below which AECL's funding cannot drop.”
MORE:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/budget/
aecl-to-get-300-million-boost/article1490400/
?cid=art-rail-budgetnews
===============================
12. Exxon Must Pay $1.2 Million for Workers’ Radiation Exposure
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/
news?pid=20601103&sid=alM4ocsiA9PA
By Bob Van Voris and Leslie Snadowsky Last Updated: March 6, 2010 00:01 EST
March 6 (Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp., the largest U.S. energy company, must pay $1.2 million to 16 Louisiana workers who claimed they were exposed to dangerous levels of radiation when they were cleaning used oil drilling pipes, a jury said.
A state court jury in Gretna, Louisiana, yesterday awarded the men amounts ranging from $10,000 to $175,000 each, finding that they face an increased risk of cancer as a result of their exposure to naturally occurring radioactive material in the used pipes between 1977 and 1992.
“It was not what I was hoping for,” said one of the men, David Perry, who was awarded $10,000.
The owners of the property where the men worked won a $1 billion punitive jury verdict against Exxon in 2001 for radioactive contamination from the pipe-cleaning operation. The punitive judgment was reduced to $112 million and paid, with interest, after Exxon’s appeals failed.
The claims are among thousands pending against Exxon and other oil companies over allegations that they put employees and residents near pipe-cleaning operations at risk from radiation- related diseases, particularly cancer.
The verdict comes after Exxon settled several claims in the case by plaintiffs who had developed cancer. None of the 16 men whose claims the jury rejected yesterday suffers from a radiation-related illness.
“We are pleased the jury rejected almost all of the plaintiffs’ claims,” Margaret Ross, a spokeswoman for Exxon Mobil, said in an e-mailed statement. “We remain disappointed that the plaintiffs’ attorneys rejected our standing offer to pay for screening tests that would show the workers have no physical injury.”
MORE: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/
news?pid=20601103&sid=alM4ocsiA9PA
===========================
13. BOOK: The Chernobyl catastrophe and its effects on language, health, politics, and the environment – Hoffman - March 8th, 2010
http://acehoffman.blogspot.com/
Dear Readers,
Nearly 24 years later, Chernobyl is still a dirty place, a dirty word.
Chernobyl has almost surely killed hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps already it is more than a million. And over time, it will kill many more. In fact, many estimates are that the vast majority who will be killed or harmed by Chernobyl were not even born at the time of the accident.
This is the legacy denied by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI, the public relations arm of the American nuclear industry) and other nuclear supporters -- including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organization (WHO, which submits all its regulations to the IAEA for approval).
IAEA and WHO admit to a few thousand dead. The NEI claims that only 38, or "under 50" people were killed due to Chernobyl (their exact guess changes now and then, but never by enough). But the truth, like the poisons, seeps out anyway. A new book, Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment, about Chernobyl was recently published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. The book's esteemed authors collected several thousand scientific studies about the after-effects of the Chernobyl meltdown. Until now these studies have never seen the light of day in America, mainly because both America and the countries of the former Soviet Union, as well as all the other nuclear nations of the world, do not want this information "scaring" the public.
It IS scary, but it's worth knowing!
The book, painstakingly edited in English by Dr. Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger, is both shocking and depressing (this author had the honor of co-writing an article with Dr. Sherman in 2009, published in Friends Journal). The book is 335 pages long, and nearly every page has about two dozen studies described briefly (more than 33,000 studies of Chernobyl's effects have been done; they could not all be reviewed or included in the book). It's stupefying. One goes numb. One can't believe the figures (and occasionally, in part due to translation errors from the European mathematical conventions to American notation, the figures undoubtedly ARE wrong). But taken as a group, the evidence is overwhelming.
So many numbers to absorb!
But fear not: The authors have thankfully provided dozens and dozens of graphical charts.
After a while, when you turn to a new page and see a new chart, you can put your finger on "1986" virtually every time (some effects are delayed). Things start to go wrong in dozens of countries: Birth rates go down, perhaps due to people being cautious about having children right after Chernobyl, or perhaps due to unrecorded miscarriages, or both. Age at time of death is down, childhood leukemia is up. The list goes on and on and on.
Chernobyl has killed as many as a hundred times more people than the next-biggest industrial disaster in human history, generally considered to be the mass chemical poisoning in Bhopal, India in 1984. Chernobyl has probably killed more people than the atomic bomb blasts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, including their horrible (and continuing) aftermath.
To this day, the nuclear industry pretends that Chernobyl killed only as many people as might die in a train wreck, or maybe in a bus going over a mountainside. Sad, but nothing substantial.
Chernobyl kills every which way imaginable. But the NEI and other pro-nuclear advocates only count obvious, unmistakable, indisputably-attributable deaths. For every death they acknowledge, their methodologies inevitably miss tens of thousands of deaths that were, in reality, caused by Chernobyl. One could dismiss their estimates out-of-hand as being the work of fools, but the problem with doing that is that a lot of fools believe those estimates.
It's the biggest lie of the 21st Century, since trillions of dollars are being spent based on the idea that nuclear power is "safe" and "clean." In reality, all designs of reactors -- new and old (and old with new names and minor refinements) -- are capable of releasing huge quantities of radioactive isotopes into the environment. Certainly, most designs are different from Chernobyl. But none are perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Perhaps an accident in America is less likely, but there is NO significant evidence of that. There is only evidence that America has been very, very LUCKY not to have experienced a full-blown meltdown yet. (Google Davis-Besse 2002 for one example of a "close call.")
The more reactors we build (if we build ANY more) and the longer we let our old reactors continue to operate, the greater the likelihood that a Chernobyl-size disaster will happen here. Many U.S. reactors are now well beyond their designed-for years of operation, but the old clunkers are kept going by a corrupt regulatory system that refuses to do its job.
And then there is the spent fuel. A catastrophe just as big or BIGGER than Chernobyl could happen in any spent fuel pool, or any dry fuel storage cask, at any time. These imperfect and inadequate storage methods are subject to earthquake or construction failures, as well as terrorists, tornados, tsunamis, even asteroids! No one can rightly claim that our nuclear facilities are secured -- not even against rogue employees. We have built the seeds of our own destruction into our environment. We should be reducing the risk, not increasing it.
But what if we are led to believe that the "disaster" would be minor? What if we are told that wildlife is flourishing in the "exclusion zone" around Chernobyl, now that there are no humans? Would it make us happy? Or would we look for the underlying facts: Birds and other animals can't read signs saying "KEEP OUT!" (in any language). So yes, there is wildlife in the "exclusion zone," but there is strong evidence that many of the creatures are dying when they get there. They don't reproduce properly, and more birds and animals from the nearby, less-contaminated areas come in to replace them, and this just keeps on happening. Migratory species pass through, eat Chernobyl's plants and animals, which are often highly irradiated, and then leave their droppings (or die) elsewhere, in a continuous, deadly, but gradual cycle.
Chernobyl had a poor design. The operators were running unauthorized experiments without proper safety equipment ready. There was no containment dome. Well, that had plusses, actually. In fact, it saved the day in some sense, since they were able to pour sand, lead, and other materials directly onto the hot reactor from helicopters flying overhead, through the invisible radioactive plume. Otherwise, the reactor might have burnt completely. As it was, "only" about 3 to 5% of the reactor core was dispersed into the environment. The rest sits there to this day, still hot thermally and radioactively, still seeping nuclear poisons into the ecosystem, untouched for the most part. Covered once with a poorly-built concrete sarcophagus, it is soon to be covered again. Right now, water gets in, and then radioactive crud oozes out. Radioactive gasses seep constantly from the numerous cracks in the "vault".
What once were some of the richest agricultural areas in the world are now foraged by scavengers: Poor, uneducated people who drift into the "exclusion zone" that surrounds the plant, where only authorized people taking proper protective measures are supposed to go.
Chernobyl's pollution is still spreading. The soil holds the cesium and the strontium and other radioactive elements, until years of rain bring them down to the roots of deep-root trees, which take them up to the surface again. Then a wildfire burns those trees, and a cloud of radioactive crud is wafted onto some other community downwind from Chernobyl. Of course the dose will be lower, but the damage will be more widespread.
Currently, most of the radiation doses that the residents of the contaminated regions are receiving are from the food they eat and the water they drink (mostly the food), not the air they breath (although that too is poisoned).
Chernobyl changed the definitions of words and gave us many new phrases which the book discusses.
Perhaps the most well-known new term is: "Children of Chernobyl."
Each year, a few hundred young children, usually with thyroid problems but always with health problems, are brought to "healthy" environments such as Southern California, USA (where this author lives and got bladder cancer a few years ago). There is always a lot of media publicity about the children, which is good for the organizers, fun for the children, and useful for the public, who are thus reminded each year of the horrible events that occurred in Chernobyl 24 years ago next month. The downside is that the public is led to believe that helping these few means the problem is being properly handled. There is, for the most part, no assistance for most of the millions who have been harmed.
Normally, and thankfully, only a small fraction of children are born with health problems. In areas that were heavily contaminated by Chernobyl's invisible poisons (invisible, but relatively easy to measure IF you have the money, the time, and the equipment), 80% of the children are born with health problems. In very heavily contaminated areas, 98% are not healthy. One of the "solutions" recommended in the book -- presumably out of desperation -- is better testing of fetuses, and abortions if the findings are severe enough.
Another new term that came out of Chernobyl is: "Liquidators." Liquidators are the people who went into the reactor to put out the fire, or flew over it -- people who put their lives on the line to save their families, their country, and our environment. There were over 800,000 liquidators. Now they are dying in droves, dying early, of cancer, heart disease, leukemia, and a general degradation of their body organs. (That's what radiation does at the very least: It ages you.)
Another new term that came out of Chernobyl is "Chernobyl AIDS." One of the main ways that radiation damages the body is that it weakens the immune system, leading to death from infectious diseases that the person might have otherwise survived.
"Chernobyl babies" are children who have serious malformations such as organs outside their bodies, shortened limbs, or no brain (only a brain stem, so they breath, but can never think). Some have essentially no bones -- they are called "jellyfish children" and the only other place they have been seen was on the Marshall Islands after nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s. The children of liquidators are especially likely to be "Chernobyl babies."
What a thing to look forward to if YOUR nuclear power plant melts down, or if its spent fuel burns up, or if some other catastrophe causes another massive spill! Or if your local nuclear power plant just leaks too much tritium, like so many do.
If you live in the northern hemisphere (as most of us do), Chernobyl is blamed for about 2% of what is now called your "natural background radiation." But one should not be too encouraged to hear that it is "only" 2%. For one thing, it is reasonable to believe that the background radiation, which is unavoidable, is also the root cause of many cancers which have no other obvious cause. Second, the actual value for some places may be much higher than the "average" for the whole planet (or a little lower). There are millions of hectares of farmland which still have significantly higher radiation levels as a result of Chernobyl.
Monitoring what is being fed to people who already live in contaminated zones is one of the most important tools for protecting them from the damages of radiation. Needless to say, it's expensive and is rarely done. Another problem is that companies which know they are "over the limit" with some of their supplies mix the contaminated food with less radioactive food so the average dose is legally permissible. But the same amount of radionuclides are being dispersed into the population. It's an inexcusable crime that happens all the time.
More new phrases and meanings:
The "Red Forest" is the area immediately surrounding Chernobyl -- hundreds of square miles -- where the trees have turned color for some unknown reason.
The "Chernobyl effect" is an increased thyroid cancer rate. There is also an increased mortality rate if you do get the disease than in the less contaminated regions of the world (perhaps because your entire body is already degraded by the radioactive poisons).
We all are degraded by Chernobyl. Chernobyl's radioactive isotopes continue to invade us all. The general term for what Chernobyl has done is "geobotanical catastrophe."
Like the "Children of Chernobyl," "Physicians of Chernobyl," "Widows of Chernobyl" and "Liquidators Unions" are large groups of people who have been adversely affected by the tragedy.
"Chernobyl limbs" are deformities of the arms and/or legs, more common in the more contaminated zones.
"Chernobyl heart" is a malformed heart the does not do its job properly.
"Radiation in utero" is the poisoning of a fetus in the womb, also an ongoing problem.
Other new medical terms arising from the Chernobyl disaster include "vegetovascular dystonia," a nervous system breakdown, "incorporated long-life radionuclides," and "acute inhalation lesions of the upper respiratory tract" which are mainly seen in liquidators, and include a combination of: "rhinitis, throat tickling, dry cough, difficulty breathing, and shortness of breath, owing to the effect of inhaled radionuclides, including 'hot particles'."
Chernobyl illnesses are no fun. "Typical complaints from liquidators" include: "severe headaches, not relieved by medication, impaired memory of current events, general weakness, fatigue, diminished capacity for work, generalized sweating, palpitations, bone and joint pains and aches that interfere with their sleep, sporadic loss of consciousness, sensation of fever or heat, difficulty in thinking, heart seizures, flashes, loss of vision, and numbness in hands and feet."
Chernobyl's tendrils of poison have only begun to spread. Inadequate containment measures ensure that more of the original reactor core will leak out of the site, into the environment, and into our bodies. Chernobyl's radiation has damaged hundreds of millions of people, if not billions, and continues to do so.
The truth about the Chernobyl catastrophe is being systematically hidden from the people, especially in every country with nuclear power, by their governments and by their nuclear industries. It is good to read the truth, but it hardly feels like a breath of fresh air.
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA
- - - - -
Hoffman is an educational software developer and the author of The Code Killers, a technical guide to the nuclear industry. The Code Killers is available as a free download from the author's web site: www.acehoffman.org .
To obtain a copy of Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment (unfortunately, the cost is ~$150!):
http://www.nyas.org/Publications/Annals/
Detail.aspx?cid=f3f3bd16-51ba-4d7b-a086-753f44b3bfc1
Written by Alexey V. Yablokov (Center for Russian Environmental Policy, Moscow, Russia), Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko (Institute of Radiation Safety, Minsk, Belarus). Consulting Editor Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger (Environmental Institute, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan).
Volume 1181, December 2009, 335 Pages
Ralph Nader: No Nukes (includes comments about the book):
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/13
Karl Grossman talks about the book (a more complete review from Karl will be forthcoming):
http://www.counterpunch.org/grossman02172010.html
-----------------------------------------
Ace Hoffman
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
phone: (800) 551-2726; (760) 720-7261
address: PO Box 1936, Carlsbad, CA 92018
Subscribe to my free newsletter today!
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
=========================
14. The Climate Change Propaganda War Is Just Getting Started
http://www.disinfo.com/2010/03/
the-climate-change-propaganda-war-is-just-getting-start/
Posted by majestic on March 7, 2010
Climate change … always entertaining. From the Washington Times:
Undaunted by a rash of scandals over the science underpinning climate change, top climate researchers are plotting to respond with what one scientist involved said needs to be “an outlandishly aggressively partisan approach” to gut the credibility of skeptics.
In private e-mails obtained by The Washington Times, climate scientists at the National Academy of Sciences say they are tired of “being treated like political pawns” and need to fight back in kind. Their strategy includes forming a nonprofit group to organize researchers and use their donations to challenge critics by running a back-page ad in the New York Times.
“Most of our colleagues don’t seem to grasp that we’re not in a gentlepersons’ debate, we’re in a street fight against well-funded, merciless enemies who play by entirely different rules,” Paul R. Ehrlich, a Stanford University researcher, said in one of the e-mails.
Some scientists question the tactic and say they should focus instead on perfecting their science, but the researchers who are organizing the effort say the political battle is eroding confidence in their work.
“This was an outpouring of angry frustration on the part of normally very staid scientists who said, ‘God, can’t we have a civil dialogue here and discuss the truth without spinning everything,’” said Stephen H. Schneider, a Stanford professor and senior fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment who was part of the e-mail discussion but wants the scientists to take a slightly different approach.
The scientists have been under siege since late last year when e-mails leaked from a British climate research institute seemed to show top researchers talking about skewing data to push predetermined outcomes. Meanwhile, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative body on the matter, has suffered defections of members after it had to retract claims that Himalayan glaciers will melt over the next 25 years.
Last month, President Obama announced that he would create a U.S. agency to arbitrate research on climate change.
Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican and a chief skeptic of global-warming claims, is considering asking the Justice Department to investigate whether climate scientists who receive taxpayer-funded grants falsified data. He lists 17 people he said have been key players in the controversy.
That news has enraged scientists…
MORE:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/05/
scientists-plot-to-hit-back-at-critics/
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10084
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Return to Uranium/Nuclear/Waste
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests