Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Three Minutes and Counting

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

CHICAGO—The Doomsday Clock now shows only “3 minutes to midnight,” according to a January announcement by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board. The group cited “unchecked climate change, global nuclear weapons modernizations and outsized nuclear weapons arsenals” as the reason for moving the clock two minutes closer to catastrophe than they had set it in 2014.

“World leaders have failed to act with the speed or on the scale required to protect citizens from potential catastrophe. These failures of political leadership endanger every person on earth,” the group said. The Science and Security Board has maintained the Doomsday Clock since 1947. Originally designed to give the public a sense of the imminent threat of the global nuclear weapons arsenal, the clock began to include the threat of global climate change in its measurements in 2007.

In its press release, the Science and Security Board wrote, “We implore the political leaders of the world to take coordinated, quick action to drastically reduce global emissions of heat-trapping gases, especially carbon dioxide, and shrink nuclear weapons arsenals. We also implore the citizens of the world to demand action from their leaders. The threat looms over all of humanity. Humanity needs to respond now, while there is still time.”

—Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jan. 19, 2015

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Workers Die, Cancer Victims Sue South Korean Nuke Operator

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

SEOUL—Three workers died December 26 as a result of inhaling toxic gas while building a new nuclear power facility in Ulsan, South Korea. A spokesperson for the utility in charge of the site, the state-run Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Co., said the company suspected that a nitrogen leak was to blame for the deaths. Korea Hydro was on high alert at the time because of threats from computer hackers who had recently claimed they could disable the control systems of the company’s 23 reactors.

Earlier in December, a group of 1,336 plaintiffs, including 301 thyroid cancer patients and their families, filed a lawsuit against Korea Hydro. The cancer patients, who all live in close proximity to four of the nuclear giant’s facilities, are seeking $13,800 in compensation each, while their family members are asking for under $3,000 per person in damages. The plaintiffs decided to sue after a court ordered Korea Hydro to pay $13,800 to a single thyroid cancer patient, Park Geum-sun, in compensation for her suffering. The case is the first class-action lawsuit brought against the South Korean utility.

Ye Bu-hae, a 69-year-old rice farmer whose wife underwent thyroid cancer surgery, joined the suit along with 66 other thyroid cancer patients from his village of 3,000 people near the Kori nuclear facility. “Our action is for our next generation,” he told Reuters.

—Reuters, Dec. 16; AP, Dec. 26, 2014

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Pilotless Drones Not So Precise 

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

LONDON—A new analysis of data available to the public about drone warfare, conducted by the human-rights group Reprieve, indicates that even when operators target specific individuals—the most focused effort of what President Obama calls “targeted killing”—they kill vastly more people than those targeted, often needing to strike multiple times. As of late November, attempts to kill 41 men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people. The human rights group Reprieve, using reports compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, examined cases in which specific people were targeted by drones multiple times. “Drone strikes have been sold to the American public on the claim that they’re ‘precise.’ But they are only as precise as the intelligence that feeds them. There is nothing precise about intelligence that results in the deaths of 28 unknown people, including women and children, for every ‘bad guy’ the US goes after,” said Jennifer Gibson, who spearheaded Reprieve’s study.

—Space Alert!, Winter/Spring 2015

Filed Under: Military Spending, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, War

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Desperate “Small Modular Reactor” Promoters Want Clean-up Funds, State Subsidies

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

AIKEN, South Carolina—Operators of the US Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site (SRS) improperly diverted $750,000 in taxpayer funds—budgeted for clean-up of the site’s extensively contaminated nuclear weapons production facilities—to small modular reactor research in 2012. The federal Office of Management and Budget learned of the shift later the same year and ordered SRS to stop misusing the funds. However, the mismanagement of taxpayer dollars did not become public until this January, after the watchdog group SRS Watch discovered it through a federal open records request.

SRS officials did not respond to questions from reporters on whether the money was ever restored to the cleanup budget—which many argue is already inadequate. In recent years, interest in the still-unproven small modular reactor technology has waned despite other, more straightforward government subsidies. Even Babcock & Wilcox which was awarded a $150 million government grant in 2012 to pursue the technology has significantly scaled back the investment of its own funds in “cookie cutter” reactors.

However, the Washington State Senate does not seem to have gotten this memo. Among the bills proposed there by Republican State Senator Sharon Brown in February are those that would provide a sales tax exemption for small-scale reactor production, require the state’s Commerce Department to support market development for small reactors, and modify the state’s renewable energy definition to include electricity from small nuclear reactors.

—The State (South Carolina), Jan. 7; Augusta Chronicle, Jan. 11; AP, Feb. 24, 2015.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Government Calculus: How Much is Your Life Worth?

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Your life is worth $6 million less if you die in a nuclear reactor disaster than if you die in a car crash, according to Bloomberg’s analysis of US government statistical models. When the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Transportation Department consider safety upgrades to nuclear power stations and highway systems (respectively), they analyze the cost of the improvement compared to its potential to save lives, assigning dollar values to both variables.

The difference? The Transportation Department values human lives at $9 million each, while the NRC assigns just $3 million per person theoretically saved. Even if we accept the problematic assumption that human lives can be represented in dollars, the question remains: why the discrepancy?

“Using this low value has a significant effect on nuclear license renewals and new reactor approvals,” Union of Concerned Scientists physicist Ed Lyman told Bloomberg. “Nuclear plants are not required to add safety systems that the NRC deems too expensive for the value of the lives they could save.”

Even with lives valued at just $3 million per head, the nuclear industry complains that current safety requirements are too expensive. “If the NRC more accurately estimated the cost of its regulatory requirements, it would find that many of its requirements do not pass a simple cost-benefit test,” said Nuclear Energy Institute Senior Vice President Anthony Pietrangelo at a December 3 Senate hearing. —Bloomberg, Dec. 10, 2014

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 236
  • 237
  • 238
  • 239
  • 240
  • …
  • 266
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch