SMOKE SCREEN – why building new nukes is a lost opportunity for humankind with precious time and money wasted on the wrong choice | Fairewinds Energy Education

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. At least $8.2 Trillion would be needed to build the 1,000 atomic reactors the nuclear industry wants – that’s 1 reactor every 12-days for 35-years. Watch the animation to see what it means and why!

If you want more information, we have issued a paper, and presented this topic at several major universities and forums , and wanted to make it more accessible to people throughout the world. Truthout published Arnie Gundersen’s summation of this project in a news analysis entitled: Nuclear Power Is Not “Green Energy”: It Is a Fount of Atomic Waste.

People often say: here’s what it boils down to, but at Fairewinds we have found that in the nuclear business, ‘boiling something down’ is not a good thing to do!  Here in Vermont, where we make maple syrup from the sap of the maple tree, we say: ‘here’s how it sugars off’.  Fairewinds has sugared off the data to give you this 2-minute CO2 Smokescreen Animation; we hope it clarifies a tough topic.

fairewinds.org/nuclear-energy-education//smokescreen
煙幕 on Vimeo

Nuclear Power Is Not "Green Energy": It Is a Fount of Atomic Waste

truth-out.org/.../nuclear-power-is-not-green-energy-it-is-a-fount-of-atomic-waste

１２/１１反原発・反核集会のお知らせ | No Nukes Action Committee

１２/１１反原発・反核集会のお知らせ (english below)***

早いもので２０１６年も終わりつつあります。忌まわしい福島メルトダウンからすでに５年半以上もの月日が流れました。

その間、国はできるだけのことをして福島犠牲者を救ってきたのか？　どうして過酷事故が起きてしまったのか、その事実を国民に隠さず見せたのか？　二度と悲惨な事故が起きないよう、努力してきたのか？　残念ながら、その答えは全部ノーです。自主避難者への住宅支援が打ち切られようとしています。

カリフォルニアを２度訪れて、福島の現状を報告した椎名千恵子さんが次のヴィデオの始め５分間で、現在の状況を説明しています。https://youtu.be/BTei5YC-LKg

国民は、事実を見つめなければならない時、国は放送・報道の自由を奪い、学校教育では原発の危険性を教えず、東京オリンピックで日本国を世界に宣伝し、日本は安全だと嘘をつき、国民の意欲を高揚させようとしています。

「日本最高！」～愛国と奉仕にみちびくオリンピック・パラリンピック教育
http://www.labornetjp.org/news/2016/1130nezu

このような日本の原発政策は許せません。軍国主義へと向かっている政策と一体しています。抗議の声をあげましょう！今年最後の１１日集会です。今年の締めくくりとして、多くの参加を願います。

第５３回月例１１日、１２月反原発・反核抗議集会

日時　：　１２月１１日，日曜日　午後３時から

　　　　　安倍首相への手紙読み上げとスピークアウト。４時ごろ解散予定

場所　：　サンフランシスコ日本領事館前、２７５ Battery Street、SF

　　　　　（BART. Embarcadero駅より３−４ブロック）

主催　：　No Nukes Action   www.nonukesaction.wordpress.com

Workers Speakout At International Labor Rally In Tokyo

*** GOOGLE TRANSLATE –

12/11 Announcement of anti-nuclear / anti-nuclear rally
Posted by k.delaney on December 6, 2016

Early ones are coming to an end in 2016. Five more than a half years passed already from abominable Fukushima meltdown.

Meanwhile, the country has done as much as possible and saved Fukushima victims? Why did the severe accident happen, did not hide the fact from the public? Have you made an effort to prevent a miserable accident again? Unfortunately, the answer is all no. Housing support for volunteer evacuees is about to be discontinued.

Visited California twice and Chieko Shiina who reported the current situation in Fukushima explains the current situation in the first 5 minutes of the next video. https://youtu.be/BTei5YC-LKg

When citizens have to look at the facts, the country deprives freedom of broadcasting and press, school education does not teach the dangers of nuclear power, promotes Japan to the world at the Tokyo Olympic Games, Japan says it is safe to lie I am trying to raise the motivation of the people.
"Japan's best!" - Olympics and Paralympic Education that will patronize with patriotism and service
http://www.labornetjp.org/news/2016/1130nezu

Such nuclear power policies in Japan can not be allowed. It is integrated with the policy toward militarism. Let's give a voice of protest! It is the last 11th meeting this year. I wish for much participation as this year's closing.

The 53rd monthly 11th, December Anti-nuclear / anti-nuclear protest rally
Date and time: December 11, Sunday from 3 pm
Reading letters to Abe and speaking out. Scheduled to be dissolved around 4 o'clock
Place: before the Consulate in San Francisco 275 Battery Street, SF
(3-4 blocks from BART. Embarcadero station)
Organized by: No Nukes Action www.nonukesaction.wordpress.com


１２/１１反原発・反核集会のお知らせ | No Nukes Action Committee

#NuclearHotseat 284: CHERNOBYL EXCLUSIVE / Fukushima / EPA’s Gina McCarthy’s “Protective” Action Guides for radioactivity in water

Nuclear Hotseat #284: CHERNOBYL EXCLUSIVE!

New Arch Not “the End;” It’s the Beginning –
On-The-Ground Report w/Lucas Hixon

Up Close and Personal w/Chernobyl: nuclear researcher Lucas Hixon on his work at site in Ukraine, possible problems, need for ongoing monitoring – will spring rains soften underlying marsh, compromise the structure? Will the international community continue to support the decommissioning work or will they forget? And what has Chernobyl taught us about Fukushima? Details you won’t get on mainstream media! Plus EPA’s Gina McCarthy’s “Protective” Action Guides for radioactivity in water get her in the ultimate hot water: Numnutz of the Week – again!

LISTEN NOW > Nuclear Hotseat #284: CHERNOBYL EXCLUSIVE! – New Arch Not “the End;” It’s the Beginning – On-The-Ground Report w/Lucas Hixon

NUCLEAR ENERGY IS DIRTY ENERGY (and does not fit into a “clean energy standard”) – Briefing Paper [PDF]

The nuclear power industry spent more than $650 million on lobbying, campaign contributions and advertising from 2000-2010 in its persistent effort to achieve a nuclear “renaissance.”1

Now that the nuclear “renaissance” has sputtered, with only 5 of some 35 reactor proposals currently being pursued, the industry is turning its attention— and money--toward preventing the shutdown of many aging reactors unable to compete economical- ly with wind and solar power.

One of the industry’s primary goals has been to convince federal and state legislators, regulatory officials, and the media that nuclear power is some- how “clean” energy, because nuclear reactors emit little carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. But this disregards the alphabet soup of other cancer- causing pollutants spewed into our air and water by nuclear facilities. Unfortunately, lobbying cam- paigns backed by so much money often attain some success.

Thus, there are increasing calls from nuclear indus- try backers, inside and outside of government, to include nuclear power in Renewable Energy Stand- ards (or new “Clean Energy Standards”) intended to boost use of clean renewables, or to permit nuclear to trade emissions credits in regional cap-and-trade emissions programs. This is occurring at both the federal and state levels to encourage use of nuclear power (and for some proponents, coal and natural gas as well) to the detriment of genuinely clean and affordable technologies like wind, solar, energy efficiency and others.2

This trend is likely to accelerate as states prepare plans to implement the Environmental Protection Agency’s carbon reduction rules over the next two years.

Proposals to include nuclear power as part of a Clean or Renewable Energy Standard suffer from three fundamental misconceptions: 1) that carbon dioxide is the only pollutant that matters when de- fining “clean energy;” 2) that because radiation is invisible and odorless, it is not a toxic pollutant; 3) that nuclear power is carbon-free. None of these is true.

Only one of the many technologies that can produce electricity is capable of a catastrophic accident that can kill tens or even hundreds of thousands of peo- ple, presents a security threat of unprecedented pro- portions because of this vulnerability, and creates a lethal byproduct that will be toxic for hundreds of thousands of years: nuclear power. To call nuclear power “clean” is an affront to science and common sense...

more: Briefing Paper: NUCLEAR ENERGY IS DIRTY ENERGY (and does not fit into a “clean energy standard”) [PDF] | NIRS

Pilgrim’s Progress: Inside the American Nuclear-Waste Crisis - The New Yorker

On a mild September day in 2012, Paul Rifkin asked a friend with a helicopter to help him perform an experiment. Rifkin, a retired restaurateur turned amateur photographer, wanted to capture aerial images of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, which sits on the shores of Cape Cod Bay, a quick drive from his home. He had taken an interest in the facility a year and a half earlier, after an earthquake and tsunami in Fukushima, Japan, caused a series of explosions and meltdowns in three coastal reactors—all nearly identical in design to the one at Pilgrim. Rifkin had recently joined the Cape Downwinders, a group of local residents concerned about the plant’s safety, and hoped to test assertions by a Pilgrim manager that the airspace above the plant was secure. The flyover photos he snapped that day suggested it wasn’t, but they also showed something else. On the site, near the reactor building, Entergy, the facility’s owner, had broken ground on a twelve-thousand-square-foot concrete pad. Rifkin and his fellow-activists would later learn that it was intended as storage space for the plant’s accumulating radioactive waste…

more: Pilgrim’s Progress: Inside the American Nuclear-Waste Crisis - The New Yorker

photo: "When Cape Cod’s Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station closes, in 2019, it will still be home to some eight hundred tons of spent fuel." COURTESY PAUL RIFKIN

update on my medical situation

Robert Cherwink’s Daily • #RCDaily #ECO | #RCDaily #ECO ::: WEEKLY edition

The #OcNukeDaily • #OccupyNuclear | The #OcNuke Weekly • #OccupyNuclear

UPDATE 17 NOVEMBER: a quick update on my medical situation: i met with my surgeon yesterday, and he wants to try a course of injections for my neck rather than perform surgery at this point. the muscle spasms in my neck and shoulders have literally pulled my shoulder out of place so that i have been having some serious difficulty with my right arm; also, we have discovered that there are 4 bad disks instead of only 3 – hopefully this therapy will work and no surgery need!  

previous: whats up: what next: regarding today's edition

Support #OcNukeDaily & #OccupyNuclear - GoFundMe

Nuclear Power Is Not "Green Energy": It Is a Fount of Atomic Waste

By Arnie Gundersen

Starting in 1971, I became a card-carrying member of the "nuclear priesthood." I began as a licensed nuclear reactor operator and progressed through the industry to become a senior vice president. I believed, with religious fervor, that by helping to build and operate atomic power reactors, I would be creating power that was "too cheap to meter." The historic 1973 gasoline shortages and long lines of cars queued at the pumps made it clear to me and hundreds of other nuclear engineers that nuclear power was the only solution to the "energy shortage." In the 1970s and '80s, solving this apparent energy shortage was our only mantra. At that time, there was no scientific data connecting fossil fuels to climate change.

In 1953, President Eisenhower initiated his "Atoms for Peace" program as a means to transform the atom from a scourge into a benefit for mankind and created grand illusions of at least 1,000 US atomic plants by the year 2005. However, well before the 1979 disaster at Three Mile Island, nuclear construction costs were skyrocketing and construction schedules were constantly slipping. The overzealous goal of 1,000 US atomic power reactors dwindled to about 110 finally completed reactors, while more than 120 others that had been on the drawing boards were canceled before producing a single watt of power.

By 1985, Eisenhower's dream of reclaiming the power of the atom for peaceful purposes had unraveled and had become a nightmare. Electric rates continued to skyrocket and ratepayers were left picking up the pieces from Atoms for Peace.

Of the more than 230 attempts to construct atomic power reactors in the United States during the 20th century, only 99 reactors are still operating. Globally, a total of 438 atomic power reactors were still operating in 2015, according to the World Nuclear Association.

During the 20th century, the lights stayed on and the prediction of a dire energy shortage never materialized. Nuclear power's claims that it would be an economic nirvana "too cheap to meter" collapsed as well. Entering the 21st century, renewables began to appear more feasible, so the atomic power industry latched on to NASA's James Hansen's 1988 prognosis of the global buildup in CO2 resulting in global climate change as a new justification for existence. Armed with this new marketing ploy, nuclear power lobbyists flooded Capitol Hill looking for financing to fund the 21st century "nuclear renaissance."

Does the nuclear industry's latest claim that it is the world's salvation from increasing levels of CO2 hold up under scrutiny? No. The evidence clearly shows that building new nuclear power plants will make global warming worse...

more: Nuclear Power Is Not "Green Energy": It Is a Fount of Atomic Waste

Environmental Protection Agency's New Emergency Plan for Drinking Water Concerns Many | NBC Bay Area [VIDEO]

The EPA's Plan for drinking water concerns many, however, it may take effect within weeks



It happened with devastating speed in Fukushima, Japan.

It’s happening slowly all over the United States: radioactive waste is seeping into the soil and groundwater.

As she paces the fence at Lawrence Livermore Labs near her home, Marylia Kelley shakes her head about a new Environmental Protection Agency proposal that could affect communities like hers if a future radioactive release were to occur. It’s called a Protective Action Guide, or PAG. If formally adopted, it would set new, much higher levels on radioactive materials to be allowed in drinking water supplies following any kind of “radiological” accident or spill for an undetermined “intermediate” period of time...

more: Environmental Protection Agency's New Emergency Plan for Drinking Water Concerns Many | NBC Bay Area