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

July 14, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Who Has Time to Think About Nuclear Weapons?

Nukewatch’s Kelly Lundeen was arrested with 16 other abolitionists including Frida Berrigan whose article follows at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations in New York, demanding that the U.S. join the nuclear weapons ban treaty. See report, p. 3. Photo: Ellen Grady.

By Frida Berrigan

Nuclear weapons might be low on the list of most people’s concerns right now, but resisting them has never been more important.

“Pretty far from the pulse.” That was the comment someone on social media wrote below a photo of me getting arrested at an anti-nuclear protest near the United Nations in early March. Despite being strangely immune to my winning smile and pooh-poohing someone else’s work and passion to perhaps feel a bit superior, that person wasn’t wrong. After all, who has time to think about nuclear weapons when there’s so much else to worry about: Trump-Musk’s kleptocracy and government-busting, the daily fresh hell of Trump-Vance’s war on woke or the rise of white nationalists. Nuclear weapons — the most powerful and destructive weapon in the world — are not even on most people’s list of top 10 fears or top 10 causes they care about.

Unfortunately, this lack of interest doesn’t mean that nuclear weapons have somehow auto-disarmed. Thankfully, there is a serious, militant, and ever burgeoning international movement — mostly from the Global South — that is working toward nuclear abolition and that has led to the creation of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The treaty came out of grassroots organizing initiated by the nations most affected by nuclear weapons every day. It is no small feat that the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons has now been signed and ratified by half the world’s governments. Sadly (but not surprisingly), the United States — the world’s largest nuclear power and only country to use nuclear weapons in war — has yet to sign on.

And that’s the reason I was in New York City on March 5, standing on First Avenue and 45th Street, with my hands behind my back in metal handcuffs. While parties to the TPNW were meeting inside the United Nations, protesters convened by the Atlantic Life Community, Nukewatch, and War Resisters League were standing outside, calling on a recalcitrant United States to send someone from the U.S. Mission to attend.

The goal was to block traffic in front of the United Nations, ostensibly making it easier for the U.S. delegation to get to the meeting. As we prepared to block traffic, I grabbed onto the banner imploring the U.S. to join the treaty. It was 40 feet long, made of taped strips of paper, and extremely fragile and slippery. Holding onto it in the late winter wind took so much concentration that I forgot to be fearful as I stepped into traffic. A block away, another team carried a banner saying “Ban nuclear weapons which are illegal and immoral.”

It was a moment of genuine happiness. In the end, 17 of us were arrested. Although we didn’t convince the U.S. to send anyone to the treaty meeting, we did make a pretty big stink — and a team from our group wheatpasted the text of the related Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty onto the ground in front of the U.S. Mission.

So, going back to that person who commented “pretty far from the pulse” on the photo of my arrest, I’ll say this: The pulse is the resistance — and it is inside the resister. It gets bigger when we resist together, it helps us overcome fear and stay connected. In actions large or small, individual acts or mass movements, photographed or unnoticed, the pulse is there in the resistance. We couldn’t be closer to the pulse, because it is inside of us!

— Frida Berrigan is an author and columnist with Waging Nonviolence. This article, originally published at wagingnonviolence.org, was shortened for space.

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

July 14, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

President Trump to Remove Nuclear Power Guardrails

From Beyond Nuclear, May 15, 2025

On May 14, 2025, E&E News online updated reports on President Donald Trump’s four “pre-decisional” White House Executive Orders to radically alter the historic role of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to oversee the performance of reactor design “safety reviews” and the regulatory approval of reactor siting, construction, and operation for commercial nuclear power reactors.

In President Trump’s view, the NRC’s “overly burdensome regulations” are the primary obstacle to guaranteeing the development and construction of a national “nuclear renaissance.” As a result, the White House is eyeing a “wholesale regulatory revision” of the NRC that includes mandatory “reductions in force.” Simultaneously, the White House is considering authorizing the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Department of Defense (DOD) to take charge of quadrupling the current domestic nuclear power capacity to 400 gigawatts by 2050. In order to achieve this goal, the draft Executive Orders outline: 1) “overhauling NRC”; 2) significantly accelerating “nuclear R&D”; 3) redefining commercial nuclear power development as critical “national security” infrastructure; and 4) dramatically expanding the U.S. “nuclear supply chain” to include ramping up domestic uranium mining, milling, enrichment, and fabrication of nuclear reactor fuel.

While no energy generation system is entirely domestically sourced, the U.S. nuclear fuel supply is predominantly sourced through foreign imports. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency
reporting in 2025, U.S. domestic uranium mines produce roughly 1% of the uranium concentrate U3O8 (triuranium octoxide or uranium yellowcake), needed to fuel the current U.S. reactor fleet in 2023. Foreign imports accounted for 99% of our nation’s U3O8, with 48% coming from Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Presently, Russia is also the only commercially viable global supplier of high-assay, low enriched uranium fuel needed for proposed Small Modular Reactor designs, including Bill Gate’s TerraPower “Natrium” liquid sodium-cooled fast reactor and X-Energy’s Xe-100 high-temperature, gas-cooled, pebble-bed reactor.

A Trump Administration Executive Order says that it will no longer recognize federal agencies as “independent” but rather will consider all of them subject to presidential supervision and control. All “significant regulatory actions” of the NRC would be reviewed by the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or OIRA, opening the process to White House review for comments, edits, and influence. E&E News observed that the new process “obscures the public record of internal commission deliberations” and is an apparent violation of the Atomic Energy Act which clearly mandates that NRC decision-making remain independent.

The draft order to overhaul the NRC would also require the agency to reconsider its standard for radiation exposure where it now understands that there is no safe dose of radiation. Dr. Edwin Lyman, a physicist and Director of Nuclear Power Safety for the Union of Concerned Scientists, is quoted in the E&E News article, saying, “Documented scientific evidence has only indicated that [low-level radiation exposure] is more dangerous than was known decades ago, when these standards were set.” Furthermore, Dr. Lyman adds, “Evidence has emerged about the impact of the level of radiation exposure on cardiovascular disease.”

The White House draft order to reframe nuclear power deployment for “national security” sets up the DOE and the DOD to “work around the NRC-led licensing and safety review processes” by providing the Secretaries of Defense and Energy accelerated schedules to “identify military facilities at which advanced nuclear technologies can be immediately installed and deployed.” Those military base-sited nuclear power reactors could then provide transmission to the electric grid for commercial power.

It is alarming that Trump’s Executive Orders fast tracking the still theoretical and cost-prohibitive construction of unproven “Generation IV” reactors by destroying the NRC comes at precisely the wrong time.

This is the 50th Anniversary Year of the creation of the NRC, following the abolition of the Atomic Energy Commission by Congress, because of the AEC’s blatant fast-track promotion and licensing of power reactors, and its disregard for public health and safety. Today, too many of those aging and deteriorating nuclear power stations are approaching or have exceeded 50 years of harsh operating experience involving: radioactive neutron bombardment; embrittlement; cracking in base metal and weld materials; and metallic fatigue and corrosion under a combination of extreme heat, high pressure, and heavy vibration. Nobody knows better the growing level of uncertainty, the multitude of technical knowledge gaps, and innumerable shrinking reactor safety margins thank those NRC nuclear engineers fired by executive order. Certainly, not Trump.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

July 14, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear Power’s Great Financial Hoax Can No Longer be Hidden or Ignored

By Colt Stewart

Thirty-eight years ago, the California Legislature passed the Nuclear Moratorium Act. Governor Jerry Brown signed it into law. The law, still on the books today, says that until the federal government certifies a “permanent” method of disposing of radioactive waste, no new nuclear reactors will be built in California. Those of us who worked on and defended this legislation knew the day would come when the ratepayers of California would have to pay the piper for decommissioning those reactors already under construction and we did not want to see the ratepayers stuck with the ultimate costs of decommissioning even more.

The Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Mississippi River, of which Nukewatch is a co-founder, inflated this mock radioactive waste cask beside an info table at the 2025 May Day Parade and celebration in Minneapolis, Minn. The group marched in the parade to raise awareness of the threat the Monticello reactor poses to the river and to drinking water for millions. Photo: Kelly Lundeen.

The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) knew it. The elected officials knew it. The ratepayer watchdog groups knew it. The utility companies knew it. The environmental groups knew it. The lawyers, engineers, and other staffers knew it.

Through “all events tariffs,” the utilities financed the development and construction of their complex, dangerous, large-scale power generating stations in essence financially risk-free. Their argument was always, “We wish to assure the public a reliable source of low-cost electricity.” Sounds reasonable, right? But they never factored in the decommissioning costs or the cost of permanently disposing of the long-term (like up to 1 million years) nuclear waste. In a shortsighted attempt to keep electric rates low, utility executives, PUC commissioners, ratepayer protection groups, engineers, and lawyers all put off attempting to identify those costs until such time — in the future — when they would become due.

Well that time is now.

The great hoax of nuclear power — an endless supply of cheap electricity — is now before us. There are still two gigantic unpaid bills coming due: for decommissioning the existing reactors that have outlived their useful lives, and for the long-term containment and abandonment of the radioactive waste which has overrun all the interim short-term storage solutions. These bills must be paid, whether by the ratepayers, the shareholders, the consumers, the insurance companies, the manufacturers, or all of the above.

— Colt Stewart of Palm Desert is a former Senior Energy Consultant to the California Assembly. He wrote this piece for The Desert Sun.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

July 14, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Irony Lives: “Clean Energy” Tax Credits Critical for Nuclear’s Future

The nuclear power lobby has abandoned its former motto ⸺ “electricity too cheap to meter” ⸺ and replaced it with the fairy tale that nuclear reactors are “clean” and the “answer to climate change.” The industry has spent so much money lobbying on Capitol Hill and on campaign financing, that Congress bought the whole charade and added nuclear reactor operations to its list of “clean energy” tax credit beneficiaries.

Now, with the Trump backlash against any acknowledgment of climate change or fossil fuel pollution, House Republicans are pushing drilling, mining, and burning and want to rescind all the Congressional “clean energy” tax credits.

Proving that irony is not dead, the myth-making nuclear industry is crying foul, as some of the tax credits identify and “incentivize” reactors as “clean energy assets” ⸺ the very fiction that the industry created.

Consequently, over 100 utilities, industry suppliers, and reactor developers, organized by the Nuclear Energy Institute, wrote to Congress April 30 demanding retention of the tax credits which keep alive dreams of new reactor construction.

The credits are essential to nuclear’s economic future, the letter says, and are “critical to strengthening U.S. energy security” ⸺ meaning the industry cannot compete any more, and its CEO’s have said so.

Speaking in New York City on Nov. 27, 2013, World Bank President Dr. Jim Yong Kim said, “The World Bank Group does not engage in providing support for nuclear power. … we don’t do nuclear energy.”

The U.S. Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism concluded in 2009 that governments should help stop nuclear weapons proliferation by “discouraging … the use of financial incentives in the promotion of civil nuclear power.”

John Rowe, a former chairman and CEO of the nuclear power-heavy Exelon Corp. said “unequivocally,” in March 2012, “that new [reactors] don’t make any sense right now…. It just isn’t economic, and it’s not economic within a foreseeable time frame.”

Even the former CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, Marvin Fertel, told Scientific American in 2012, “We won’t build large numbers of new nuclear in the U.S. in the near term. Today, you ought to build gas.” And Bill Johnson, CEO of Progress Energy, said in the same article, “Nuclear can’t compete today.” In 2011, Siemens Corp. declared that, following Germany’s decision to close all 17 of its reactors by 2022 (all built by Siemens), the company would stop building new reactors anywhere in the world. “The chapter for us is closed,” said Chief Executive Peter Löscher.

Calling new reactors “too expensive,” Jon Wellinghoff, a former chair of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, said in 2009, “We may not need any, ever,” adding that renewables “like wind, solar and biomass would be able to provide enough energy to meet base load capacity and future demand.”

Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of the reactor engineering giant General Electric, said in 2010, “If you were a utility CEO and looked at your world today, you would just do gas and wind. … You would never do nuclear. The economics are overwhelming.”

Asked about Duke Power Florida’s August 2013 decision to cancel new reactor plans, former Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chair Peter Bradford told the Tampa Bay Times that a nuclear construction boom, “was just this artificial gold rush. And yes, it does show the renaissance is dead.” ⸺ JL

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Renewable Energy

July 14, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Report: Radiation and the Damage it Causes

A new publication from Beyond Nuclear, “Radiation and harm to human health,” is the latest in its series of booklets that together comprise what it calls, “The Case Against Nuclear Power: Facts and Arguments from A-Z.” Available online, BN says: “It’s time to set the record straight on radiation and the damage it causes, particularly to pregnancy, children and women. Contrary to what Trump’s recent executive orders claim, abundant and largely officially ignored, scientific evidence demonstrates that childhood cancers increase around normally operating nuclear facilities, with indications that these cancers begin during pregnancy. Uranium mining to get fuel for reactors, a worldwide environmental justice travesty, is also associated with a number of health impacts. Even already existing background radiation (from the nuclear industry’s uranium fuel chain) is associated with childhood cancers — a fact that nuclear proponents conveniently forget — the industry compounds these health impacts by releasing radiation accidentally, and routinely, from nuclear reactors; releases the U.S. NRC has been happy to legalize. Clearly our current radiation standards aren’t protective enough.”

— Read it here: https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/radiation-and-harm-to-human-health_27-july.pdf

Filed Under: Environmental Justice, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • …
  • 94
  • 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