Saturday, March 25, 2017

Native American Forum on Nuclear Issues 2017 – April 22-23 | CENSORED NEWS

Native American Forum on Nuclear Issues 2017

Western Shoshone, Timbisha Shoshone, Havasupai, Dine' and Paiute speak out
on radioactive dumping in Native American communities
By Ian Zabarte, Western Shoshone
Secretary of the Native Community Action Council

Censored News

LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- Native Americans are preparing to meet the renewed threat of the proposed Yucca Mountain High Level Nuclear Waste Repository by educating themselves about cancer risks by hosting the Native American Forum on Nuclear Issues 2017 (NAFNI 2016) at the UNLV Barrick Museum Auditorium. 

Joe Kennedy of the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe in Death Valley stated, “Our effort is focused on cancer prevention by understanding exposure pathways then conducting risk mitigation in Native American communities.” 

Since 1951 the US and UK have conducted nuclear testing within Western Shoshone homelands causing a wide variety of adverse health consequences know to be plausible from exposure to radiation in fallout. The proposed Yucca Mountain high level nuclear waste repository, if licensed, will add significant risk factors to the lives of the Shoshone and Paiute people. According to Ian Zabarte, Secretary of the Native Community Action Council, “Yucca Mountain is within the Shoshone treaty boundary and therefore cannot meet the licensing requirement of ownership since the treaty is in full force and effect. This is our primary contention at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety Licensing Board.” . 

The NAFNI 2017 will have presenters speaking about protecting the Grand Canyon including Professor Michael Lerma of Northern Arizona University, author of Indigenous Sovereignty in the 21st Century; Tribal Council Member, Carletta Tillousi, Havasupai Tribe; Klee Benally, Dine’ (Navajo); Leona Morgan, Dine’ No Nukes; Joe Kennedy of the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe; and the Native Community Action Council board members representing Shoshone and Paiute people.

more on the Native Community Action Council –
CENSORED NEWS: Native American Forum on Nuclear Issues 2017

Friday, March 24, 2017

NIRS Telebriefing APRIL 5 – "Spring:The Season of Nuclear Disaster--Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima."

Register below to join NIRS's next national telebriefing:
Spring:The Season of Nuclear Disaster--Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima. 
Wednesday, April 5th at 8:00pm EDT/7:00pm CDT
The program will focus on the major nuclear disasters that have had global impact: Three Mile Island (March 1979), Chernobyl (April 1986) and Fukushima (March 2011). 
The briefing will include the following presenters, and will be followed by questions and answers with the audience:
  • Arnie Gunderson, Fairewinds Energy Education
  • Moderator: Mary Olson, Director, NIRS Southeast Office 
Arnie Gundersen has more than 45-years of nuclear power experience. He holds a nuclear safety patent, was a licensed reactor operator who taught reactor physics, and was a senior vice president for the nuclear power industry. As Chief Engineer for Fairewinds Associates, Mr. Gundersen is an expert witness who testifies to federal agencies including the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding nuclear design defects, safety flaws, and decommissioning. His testimony provided valuable insight into the Three Mile Island atomic meltdown, Vermont Yankee (VY) underground pipe failures, and steam generator flaws at San Onofre in California. Concerned about the triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi, Mr. Gundersen has presented to Japanese universities, the National Press Club, and to members of the Diet. He, his wife Maggie, and Reiko Okazaki authored the Japanese bestselling book,Fukushima Daiichi: The Truth and The Way Forward published by Shueisha Publishing (2012).
The Fairewinds Crew created this special 2-minute animation to show you why building new nukes is a lost opportunity for humankind with precious time and money wasted on the wrong choice. Check out CO2 Smokescreen here

REGISTER – NIRS Telebriefing APRIL 5 – "Spring:The Season of Nuclear Disaster--Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima."

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Tell the NRC: NO Deadly Nuclear Waste Transport Across the US!!!

The clock is ticking for public input!

Waste Control Specialists (WCS), in Andrews County, Texas, is seeking to expand its existing hazardous waste site to include high-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants across the country. If approved, 40,000 tons of irradiated fuel rods from nuclear reactors around the country could be transported through major cities and farmlands to be stored  for 40 years or longer on a concrete pad, creating a de facto permanent disposal facility at a site that has not been designed or evaluated for permanent isolation. 
We need your comments in opposition to the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) Consolidated "Interim" Storage waste dump site in West Texas now!

The NRC must conduct safety and environmental reviews before it decides whether to approve the dump application. Hundreds of Texas and New Mexico residents turned out last week to tell the NRC they don’t want a radioactive dump and nuclear waste shipments in their communities—now we all need to make our voices heard.
Public comments wll be accepted through March 13th. Now is the time to make our voices heard loud and clear: No Consolidated "Interim" Storage Waste Dumps!

Nuclear Regulatory Commission



Panel discussion: Morality of the Nuclear Age | April 3, 2017; Atherton, California | PSR

April 3, 2017
Atherton, California
Time: 7:00 - 9:00 pm
Location: Sacred Heart Schools, 150 Valparaiso Ave, Harman Auditorium
Panel discussion featuring PSR's Dr. Ira Helfand and other experts.
  • Richard Rhodes, Historian, Author, and Pulitzer Prize recipient; author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb

  • Ira Helfand, MD, Chair, Physicians for Social Responsibility; Co-President, International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War

  • Martin Hellman, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Stanford University; Recipient of the 2015 Turing Award for Internet Cryptology
Moderated by Michael McNerney, Board Chair, Technology for Global Security; CEO, Efflux Systems; Cyber Policy Advisor, Office of the US Secretary of Defense; Former US Air Force Officer

For further information, contact Les DeWitt, Technology for Global Security, at, Katherine Kelly at, or Louise Paustenbach at

Morality of the Nuclear Age | PSR

Sierra Club Nuclear Free Campaign Fact Sheet: How Nuclear Power Worsens Climate Change

The nuclear industry has been selling the world a story that nuclear power is a solution to climate change because it does not generate carbon dioxide (CO2), a major greenhouse gas. While this is true of the nuclear chain reaction itself, the front and back ends of nuclear power generate a large volume of CO2 and leave a trail of endlessly dangerous radioactivity along the way.

☢ Nuclear power has a big carbon footprint. At the front end of nuclear power, carbon energy is used for uranium mining, milling, processing, conversion, and enrichment, as well as for transportation, formulation of rods and construction of nuclear reactors (power plants). At the back end, there is the task of isolation of highly radioactive nuclear waste for millennia—a task which science has so far not been able to address. Large amounts of water are also used, first in mining and then in cooling the reactors.

All along the nuclear fuel chain, radioactive contamination of air, land and water occurs. Uranium mine and mill cleanup demands large amounts of fossil fuel. Each year 2,000 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste and twelve million cubic-feet of low-level radioactive waste are generated in the U.S. alone. None of this will magically disappear. Vast amounts of energy will be needed to isolate these dangerous wastes for generations to come.

☢ Nuclear power takes too long to deploy. Construction of the 1500 new reactors that the nuclear industry claims are needed to address global warming would mean opening a new reactor once every 2 weeks for the next 60 years. Reactors can take 10-15 years to build with an estimated cost of $12-15 billion each. In the past, cost and time needed for construction have each more than doubled from original estimates. We need to supply low-carbon energy sources NOW.

☢ Nuclear power is not suited for warming climates. Nuclear reactors need enormous
amounts of cool water to continually remove heat from their cores. Reactors have been forced to close during heat waves due to warmth of sea, lake or river water — just when electricity is being used most. Low water levels during heat and drought have also forced reactors to shut down. In addition, cooling causes serious damage to aquatic life, killing millions of fish and untold numbers of macroinvertebrates, aquatic eggs and larvae.

Six times as much carbon can be saved with efficiency or wind. Benjamin Sovacool from the Institute for Energy and Environment at Vermont Law School averaged the high and low estimates of carbon pollution from nuclear power. His study revealed that nuclear power’s carbon emissions are well below scrubbed coal-fired plants, natural gas-fired plants and oil. However, nuclear emits twice as much carbon as solar photovoltaic and six times as much as onshore wind farms. Energy efficiency and some of the other renewables also beat nuclear by sixfold or more.

☢ Nuclear power is not flexible. Nuclear is all-or-nothing power. A reactor can’t be geared to produce less power when electricity from renewables (like wind and solar) increases on the grid. This can make it challenging to increase renewables past a certain point.

When a reactor shuts down due to accident, planned upgrade or permanent closure, a large amount of power has to be found elsewhere. And nuclear plants are being closed, not opened — some because they no longer are making a profit. It’s important to develop renewables NOW to be able to replace the electricity when utilities announce plans to close reactors.

☢ Nuclear subsidies rob research on renewables. Nuclear power has been subsidized throughout most of its fuel chain. In 2011 the Union of Concerned Scientists published Nuclear Power, Still Not Viable without Subsidies. This report shows that in some cases subsidies were greater than the value of the electricity produced. Subsidies are supposed to be for new innovations — not for propping up outdated technologies like fossil fuels and nuclear. Nuclear is also a dirty extractive industry – and like coal, oil and gas, nuclear depends on a limited supply of natural resources (uranium) in the ground.

☢ Cost of nuclear is going up, while cost of renewables is going down. Estimates for new reactors are, on average, four times higher than estimates from just eight years ago. Estimates for new reactors are invariably far less than the final cost, with the final cost often doubling. Sometimes, as in the cases of the Columbia Generating Station, Cherokee, and Perry, billions were spent while the reactors were never finished. Costs of renewables continue going down while their efficiency increases.


Mitigating climate disruption demands sound investment in economical, expedient, clean and, most of all, safe technologies. Wind and solar are getting cheaper and more efficient by leaps and bounds. Advances are being made in energy storage. Geothermal energy is being tapped extensively.

Wind farms added about 13 gigawatts of new power in the U.S. in 2012. Solar photovoltaic (PV) plants added 4.2 gigawatts of electricity in 2013. And that's just solar PV. Solar water heaters have become very economic and popular. There are also concentrated solar power arrays that generate electricity directly from the sun's heat, so the total amount of solar power is actually higher than the PV number alone.

Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute and Arjun Makhijani of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research have written articles and books on how both carbon and nuclear can be replaced nationwide with renewables by 2050. Dr. Makhijani’s book Carbon Free and Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy can be downloaded from the internet. The phasing out of nuclear power and coal is now well underway, and the switch to wind, solar and efficiency is gaining momentum.

Check out the Nuclear Free Campaign of the Sierra Club Facebook Group and follow @NuclearFreeSC on Twitter.


2101 Webster St., Suite 1300

Oakland, CA 94612

click here for PDF

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Senators Reject Call for New Nuclear Weapons, Ending Nuclear Testing Ban - Press Releases - United States Senator for California

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) joined with 12 Senate colleagues demanding the Defense and Energy departments reject a recent Pentagon report that called for new “limited-use” nuclear weapons and suggested ending the nuclear testing ban.
“There is no such thing as a limited nuclear war, and the United States should be seeking to raise the threshold for nuclear use, not blur that threshold by building additional so-called low-yield weapons,” wrote the senators.

Senators Reject Call for New Nuclear Weapons, Ending Nuclear Testing Ban - Press Releases - United States Senator for California

Time to reject nuclear energy - Letters | The Star Online

I REFER to the report “Expert: There is rising resistance to nuke option” (The Star, March 15) where Prof Ramesh Thakur warned of “rising public opposition towards nuclear energy due to its many risks.” He emphasised that the Malaysian Government “must weigh all the potential risks, including the possibility of a nuclear accident, smuggling and theft of nuclear components.” 
It was noted that the final report of the Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review (INIR) Mission Phase 1 would soon be tabled for discussion by Cabinet, and claimed that Malaysia is thoroughly prepared to make an informed decision about introducing nuclear power. 
But there are many convincing reasons why nuclear energy is not a viable option for Malaysia. The global nuclear industry has continually failed to contain escalating costs and delays in the construction of nuclear power plants. There will always be the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation and nuclear terrorism. 
Nuclear power plants are prone to accidents but fortunately major accidents are not common. However, when they do occur, they can be catastrophic, as we have experienced in Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima…

Cheap nuclear power is a myth. Forbes magazine has called it “the biggest managerial disaster in history.” As recently as May 2009, two financial reports in the business section of the New York Times highlighted the incredible economics of building a nuclear power plant. The reports revealed two fiascos involving the construction of a new reactor in Olkiluoto in Finland by the French company, Areva, and the virtual collapse of the once touted global flagship, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. Both companies were overtaken by cost overruns amounting to billions of dollars caused by decades-long delays in completing construction schedules. 
The nuclear industry’s history of financial disasters is lamentable. It includes the loss of more than US$1tril in subsidies, abandoned projects and other public misadventures. Amory Lovins, an energy expert, has called it “the greatest failure of any enterprise in the industrial history of the world.” 
The most critical feature of nuclear power is its production of deadly nuclear waste which remains radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years and for which there is no safe, permanent method of disposal. ..

Time to reject nuclear energy - Letters | The Star Online