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

Japan to Permanently Close Five More Reactors

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

In the ever-expanding wake of the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe, in January the Japanese nuclear industry announced preliminary plans to permanently close five more of the country’s nuclear facilities. So far, in the four years since the disaster, Japan has maintained “zero nuclear” power generation. This decommissioning announcement reduces the number of the country’s operable (but suspended) reactors to 43. All six units at Fukushima Daiichi have been permanently closed, including Units 1 through 4 which were destroyed in the March 2011 accident, as well as the undamaged Units 5 and 6.

Two of the newly announced closures are Shimane Unit 1 and Tsuruga Unit 1, both GE Mark I boiling water reactors identical to Fukushima Units 1-5. The other three reactors, Genkai Unit 1 and Mihama Units 1 and 2, are aging pressurized water reactors. Company officials with Kyushu Electric, Kansai Electric, Chugoku Electric and Japan Atomic Power Company decided to decommission the reactors rather than comply with newly required expensive safety upgrades.

—Beyond Nuclear, Press Release, Jan. 15, 2015

Filed Under: Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Cree Youth Walk Over 500 Miles to  Stand Against Uranium Extraction

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

A group of about 20 young people from the Cree Nation walked almost 530 miles over three weeks this winter to deliver a message to Montreal’s environmental protection agency: “We stand against uranium mining.” The young people endured frigid conditions and covered about the distance of a marathon each day on their journey. The Stand Against Uranium Walk started in the community of Mistissini in northern Quebec on November 24 and culminated with the group’s participation in a public hearing on uranium mining in Montreal, December 15.

Youth leaders expressed their concerns about uranium mining to government officials in Quebec. Photo by Julia Page, CBC News

The group opposes a plan by the firm Strateco Resources that has been exploring uranium extraction in the Mistissini area since 2006. The company claims it has invested $120 million in its Mistissini uranium project over the last 10 years. In 2013, the Quebec government issued a moratorium on uranium mining and exploration. Now, Strateco is suing the province for its investment mistake, and Quebec has been holding public hearings on the subject.

Stand Against Uranium walkers reported overwhelming support for the ban among people they encountered on their long journey. The walkers passed through several towns affected by uranium mining, broadening the base of support for their efforts.

“Some people understand the effects of uranium, but there’s such a large number who just aren’t aware of this project. We’re the ones taking the initiative to be ambassadors to Quebec, Canada and the world,” said Youth Grand Chief Joshua Iserhoff.

“We’re protecting the land for future generations, not just for the Cree people or Aboriginal people, but for everybody.”

—ASP

—CBC News, Dec. 5 & Dec. 14; Red Power Media, Dec. 19, 2014

Filed Under: Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Uranium Mining

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear Giant Areva Lost $5.38 Billion in 2014

Reactor Plans Falling Like Dominoes
Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015

In a letter dated February 25, the French nuclear industry giant Areva asked the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to indefinitely halt the review process for certification of its new US EPR (European Pressurized Reactor) design, developed initially by Framatome (now Areva), EDF in France and Siemens in Germany. Areva made the decision to drop the US EPR project as part an overall restructuring following its record losses of $5.38 billion in 2014.

Areva’s CEO Philippe Knoche made clear reference to more profitable reactor construction futures elsewhere. World Nuclear News reported, “the company planned to emphasize growth in China, which he described as the ‘new frontier’ of global nuclear power.” China’s business climate doesn’t have to compensate for union labor, quality control standards, disaster preparedness plans, or financial liabilities which make the US reactor business costs just too high.

Areva’s announcement led Unistar Nuclear Energy and its giant partner Constellation Energy to withdraw their application for construction and operating licenses for the proposed Calvert Cliffs 3 reactor in Maryland. Their application referenced the US EPR design and could not have been approved before Areva’s new reactor was certified. The reversal means writing off a large investment by EDF/Unistar/Constellation, which pursued the Calvert Cliffs 3 licenses for eight years, initially applying to the NRC in 2007.

Calvert Cliffs 3 represented the last active plan for new reactors involving the US EPR design. In 2013, Unistar withdrew its application for a US EPR at Nine Mile Point in New York. AmerenUE dumped its plan for Callaway 2 in Missouri in 2009, and PPL Electric Utilities suspended its application for Bell Bend in Pennsylvania in 2014.

—World Nuclear News; & Engineering360, Mar. 6, 2015

 

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter

May 4, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Tesla Battery Can Boost Renewables, Helping Phase Out Nuclear

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2015
Energy Analysis

Though the transition from nuclear- and fossil-fueled to renewable electricity sources has the potential to address two imminent catastrophes facing the human race—radioactive contamination and climate change—several hurdles have stood in the way of a full-out energy revolution. Soon, Tesla Motors, Inc. may be breaking one of these barriers, unveiling new battery technology that allows for efficient storage of energy produced by renewable technologies—such as photovoltaic solar collectors and wind turbines.

On February 11, Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced the company’s new project in a conference call. “We are going to unveil the Tesla home battery, the consumer battery that would be for use in people’s houses or businesses fairly soon,” Musk said.

Musk added that he expected to introduce the new battery within two months. “We have the design done, and it should start going into production in about six months or so.”

Already known for its all-electric Model S sedan, Tesla is an established leader in lithium-ion battery technology. Musk is also the chairperson of SolarCity, which has successfully pioneered a residential rooftop solar installation strategy that allows people to lease photovoltaic panels for less than their regular electricity bill. Musk has promised that residential SolarCity units would come with battery storage within five to 10 years, enabling customers to more easily live “off-grid.” This kind of solar power, he said, would be cheaper than natural gas (and thus much cheaper than nuclear, which is struggling to cut costs in the face of booms in “fracking” gas extraction and clean energy).

Enabling the average homeowner to access viable electricity through a combination of rooftop solar power and efficient battery storage could pose a major threat to electric utilities, which have been slow to move away from “base load” power sources like coal and nuclear. Production facilities that use these dirty fuels are slow to start up and shut down, meaning they’re not compatible with more intermittently-produced renewable sources on an electric grid. Efficient energy storage, like a Tesla battery, could put the final nail in the coffin of archaic base load electricity generators.

Some utilities and states have adopted a process of “net metering,” which allows producers of home solar and wind power to sell excess electricity back through the grid. (The Nukewatch office and the Plowshares Land Trust is now electrified this way using the 10,000 watt, grid-tied solar panel system we installed in 2013.])

Others—motivated by nuclear industry lobbyists to artificially make nuclear power appear competitively priced—are causing outrage among their customers by trying to lower the rates at which they buy net-metered renewable energy or even fully eliminating net-metering. With new battery storage technology, these customers could have the option of walking away from their utilities altogether.

But many experts have argued that renewable energy production and storage will work most efficiently on a grid of significant scale, with many distributed production sources, flexible storage options, and consumer-level efficiencies. There is a role for utilities in this emerging energy system, if they are able to adapt quickly enough to fill it. Both Tesla and SolarCity do extensive outreach to existing utilities. But there is no role for nuclear or coal-based power—at least not within a society that values its own well-being.

Some may question whether a market-based corporate technology can really solve our energy problems, which arguably have been caused by the greed of other corporations (along with the failure of public policy to regulate them). Indeed, if their common vision is realized, Tesla and SolarCity will largely control markets for electricity-producing solar panels, the batteries that regulate energy storage, and the electric cars powered by renewable electricity. But in the face of a nuclear industry that insists on operating its aging reactors at full capacity even in the wake of a global disaster like the one at Fukushima—not to mention a fossil fuel industry that is irreversibly destroying our planet’s ecosystem through climate change—the rise of a dominant renewable energy industry might feel like a breath of fresh air.

—ASP

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Renewable Energy

January 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Vermont’s Largest Municipal Utility Goes 100-Percent Renewable 

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2014

Vermont may be best known for maple syrup and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, but now its largest city can boast another accomplishment. The city of Burlington (pop. 42,000) now gets 100 percent of its electricity from renewable sources. The Burlington Electric Department (BED) is the state’s largest municipal utility. Wind, hydro and biomass provide most of the city’s electricity, along with some fossil-fueled generation that comes via short-term contracts from the greater New England grid, which BED offsets with renewable energy credit purchases.

Now, with BED’s recent purchase of a nearby 7.4 megawatt hydroelectric project early in September, Burlington is 100 percent renewable. “This has been a goal of BED for over a decade, so we are excited to finally reach [it],” Mary Sullivan, communications coordinator for BED, told the Rocky Mountain Institute.

The Burlington Initiative is part of Vermont’s goal to produce 90 percent of its energy from renewable resources by 2050, including electricity, heating, and transportation.

— Rocky Mountain Institute, Oct. 21, and Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 27, 2014

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Renewable Energy

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 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