Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Weekly Column
    • Depleted Uranium
    • Direct Action
    • Lake Superior Barrels
    • Environmental Justice
    • North Korea
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
  • 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
    • Workshops
  • Donate

December 31, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

West Lake & Bridgeton Superfund Site Cleanup Approved

By Bonnie Urfer and Kelly Lundeen
Nukewatch Winter Quarterly 2018-19
Dawn Chapman and Karen Nickel, co-recipients of the 2018 Whistle Blowers Award and co-founders of Just Moms STL

As it turns out, combining radioactive waste with fire is not unique to California.

Just outside St. Louis in Bridgeton, Missouri sits the radioactive West Lake Landfill, an illegal dumping ground for nuclear weapons production waste. The Bridgeton Landfill, 600 feet away, has since 2010 been threatening the radioactive waste with an underground fire smoldering at 300 degrees. Both of the problematic sites lie within a Superfund site 1.2 miles from the Missouri River. As recently as Nov. 2 the fire reached the surface for two hours before being extinguished and could be seen from several hundred feet away.

To the relief of many, on Sept. 27, 2018, US EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler signed the Record of Decision Amendment to clean up the Superfund site. It’s taken 45 years for the EPA to come up with a plan for partial cleanup of the 143,000 cubic yards or 43,000 tons of radioactive waste. Unfortunately it comes too late for the more than 2,725 residents already living with cancers, tumors and related illnesses stemming from the dumping of radioactive waste in the north St. Louis area. (See “Authorities Dismiss Coldwater Creek Cancer Cluster” in Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2013.)

The story is another tragedy of the Manhattan Project that continues to kill today through exposure to the radioactive waste all along the nuclear fuel cycle. The spread of St. Louis’s radiation began with uranium mining in the Congo, and later by processing the uranium by Mallinckrodt Chemical Works. The West Lake Landfill is only one of several sites around St. Louis where radioactive waste was scattered. In 1973 the Cotter Corporation started secretly transporting what the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health considered the most highly radioactive of the wastes to the West Lake site. Even the truckers were unaware of the contents of the black contaminated soil they carried, taking some home for their gardens. It had previously been left near Coldwater Creek, a popular place for swimming, and along the highways, where it was found by children who played in the thick, dangerous mud.

While cleanup is pending residents continue to be exposed to gamma radiation, benzene and hydrogen sulfide fumes. Aerial readings of gamma rays show the contamination plume has not spread, but the existence of gamma rays prove that the whole area is being continuously saturated with radiation.

The cost estimate of cleanup comes in at $205 million over three years and will be covered by the Department of Energy, Exelon (current owners of the Cotter Corporation), and Republic Services (owners of the West Lake and Bridgeton Landfills); however some estimates put the project on a 5-year track. The to-do list for clean-up includes excavating the hottest spots at a depth of 8 to 12 feet, and in some instances as deep as 20 feet, then leaving the rest capped and in the ground. About 61,000 cubic yards of non-radioactive waste will remain buried, 70% of the radioactive dirt will be removed, but radioactivity in the water has not been addressed.

The cleanup plan is the result of a hard-fought struggle by local grassroots organizations like Just Moms STL and Coldwater Creek-Just the Facts Please, which are made up of community members directly impacted by health issues related to the radioactive waste. Karen Nickel, co-founder of Just Moms STL and co-recipient of the 2018 Whistle Blowers Award told reporters, “Some of us can go to sleep a little easier tonight knowing that we were successful.” The fight is not over for the local community, but regarding the decision, Nickels applauded the strength of their fight. “Every single voice matters, every single letter that was written, every single call that was made: those all matter.”

—Just Moms STL, Nov. 2, 2018; St. Louis Post-Dispatch and KDSK News, Sept. 27, 2018; Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Feb. 11, 2016; Coldwater Creek – Just the Facts Please, 2015; and see the 2018 documentary Atomic Homefront.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

October 15, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fall 2018 Nukewatch Quarterly Newsletter

Click the links below to access articles from our Fall 2018 Quarterly Newsletter. Page numbers show the printed pdf version of each page. Individual articles are also tagged by issue category.

Cover and Page 8

Nukewatch Delegation Joins Resistance to US H-bombs in Germany
Does Living Near Operating Reactors Cause Childhood Cancers? Nuclear regulators don’t want you to know

Page 1 – Fukushima Update

Japan Study Finds Rise in Cancer—Officials Deny Link to Fukushima
Tepco Admits Fukushima Water Treatment System Not Working
Hokkaido Earthquake Causes Reactor Site Blackout, Recalls Fukushima Nightmares

Page 2
Peace Camp Participants Share Some Recollections

Page 3

Continued from cover – Nukewatch Delegation Joins Resistance to US H-bombs in Germany

Page 4

Hiroshima/ Nagasaki Day Call-to-Action
Parking Lot Dumps for Rad Waste Not Welcome in Texas or New Mexico

Page 5

Kings Bay Plowshares 7 Update: Federal Court Considers Defense Motions
California Sets a Trend, Tells Congress: Ratify Ban Treaty, ‘No First Use’

Page 6

On the Bright Side

So Long to Japan’s “Breeder” of Radioactive Waste
Walkatjurra Walkabout to Ban Uranium Mines in Western Australia
The Climate’s Already Too Hot for Nuclear Power
Another Worker Exposed at Hapless Idaho Radioactive Waste Handling Site

Page 7

Nuclear Shorts

Killing Our Own: Death Toll from Nuclear Weapons Tests Continues to Rise
Nuclear War On Drugs: Minuteman Missile Base Guards Busted for Using LSD, etc.
Fukushima Cesium Found in California Wines
Pickering Reactors Win 10-Year Extension
Get Your Money Out of There!

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter

October 15, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nukewatch Delegation Joins Resistance to US H-bombs in Germany

Fall Quarterly 2018
Sixteen of 18 nuclear abolitionists who conducted a mass “go-in” protest at the Büchel Air Force Base in Germany July 15 pose at the base’s south entrance upon being released by the military. The 18, including activists from the US, Germany, The Netherlands and the UK—one in a wheel chair and another on crutches—gained entry by clipping through perimeter fences and razor wire in five separate places, in broad daylight, on a Sunday morning to bring attention to US hydrogen bombs deployed there, and to highlight the lax security surrounding nuclear weapons systems. One regional daily paper asked: “How could this happen?” Photo: Rolf Schlesener.
By Felice and Jack Cohen-Joppa

The demand of many Germans to rid their country of US nuclear weapons was again manifest by a 20-week-long series of protests at the Büchel Air Force Base in the Moselle River valley. The sponsoring group, Büchel is Everywhere: Nuclear Weapons-Free Now!, is a nation-wide coalition of 50 peace and justice groups dedicated to nonviolent civil resistance for nuclear abolition. Groups are invited to take responsibility for blockades and other creative protests during particular weeks, while camping on a plot of land next to the base, purchased five years ago by the coalition.

“Civil disobedience is forced on us because the government pays no attention to polite requests for dialogue or to petitions for a nuclear-free Germany. Major social changes, like the ousting of U.S. nuclear missiles from Europe in the 1980s, all require civil resistance to finally be accomplished,” said Marion Küpker, international coordinator for Büchel Is Everywhere!

After cutting through chain link and NATO wire fencing with 15 others on July 15, Marion, John and Ann unfurled a banner from DVG-VK (German Peace Society of War Resisters), the country’s oldest and largest peace organization.

As they did last year, Wisconsin-based Nukewatch brought a delegation of American nuclear abolitionists to join International Week at the camp, to demand that the small arsenal of US nuclear weapons stockpiled for NATO use at Büchel be sent back home.

After extensive planning in public meetings, and in broad daylight on Sunday, July 15, eighteen people—seven from the US, six from Germany, four from the Netherlands and one from England—cut through the perimeter fence in five places. They entered without interruption and walked around carrying banners, some for over an hour. One group got as far as the base runway before being apprehended. Three people, including Susan Crane, a Catholic Worker from California, walked through two unlocked interior gates and into a high security zone containing four suspected nuclear bunkers. The three climbed atop one bunker where they remained unnoticed for an hour. Guards finally took notice when they unfurled a banner: “Disarm B-61 Nukes”—a reference to the model number of the 20 nuclear weapons estimated to be there.

All 18 activists were eventually discovered, arrested, searched, ID’d and then released over four hours later with no charges, just an order to stay 100 meters away from the base for 24 hours. Their blockade of the gate 12 hours later brought no repercussions.

At the air base’s main gate, CeeCee Anderson from Atlanta, far left, joined members of the Youth Work Camp in displaying the 3-D illustration of a missile prevented from blasting off by chains of resistance.

A Quakers’ group action on July 23 involved timing and coordination. While some blocked the main gate in a routine way, others were poised for entry. On cue, a third group of three fence cutters went to work severing the wires, allowing a group of seven to walk through and get on the runway just as the Tornado jets that would carry the B-61s were to be taking off for practice. Once they’d cut the fence, that group slipped away to alert the base that protesters “are on your runway” and to stop the war games.

Those on the runway were detained, had their IDs checked and were released but were told they may face charges.

Later, a high-ranking air force pilot escorted by a local police officer came to the camp to complain. It was the first time in 20 years of the campaign that a pilot had ever approached the protest camp. With no sense of the irony, the officer scolded organizers, warning that the runway occupation action had endangered protesters and pilots.

“The base’s 20 thermonuclear bombs that pilots are training to use are a threat to the entire biosphere,” replied the campers, “so get your priorities in order.”

Nukewatch coordinator John LaForge remarked, “Yes, it’s hard to break into jail here in Germany. The civil police are so sophisticated that they go to extreme levels to pretend that nothing happened and that nuclear weapons bases are secure. Even German citizens who get prosecuted for ‘trespass’ and ‘damage to property’ (fences) have to refuse to pay fines at several levels to get a couple of days in the jug.”

During an action August 6, “Weapons Inspectors” reached this weapons bunker that was surrounded by an additional level of security razor wire causing suspicion that the nuclear weapons were being stored there.

Two days later, Crane, LaForge, German organizers Marion Küpker and Gerd Büntzly went to the chief prosecutor’s office in Koblenz, asking that the charge of trespass against Büntzly be dropped, unless the same charges are brought against the four Americans, including Crane and LaForge, who joined Büntzly for a go-in action to the nuclear bunkers in July, 2017. Last January, Büntzly was fined for the offense.

Crane and LaForge, equipped with a radiation monitor, made one last inspection for nuclear weapons on Hiroshima Day, August 6. They clipped through the perimeter chain-link fence and through a more secure razor wire fence inside to reach a set of previously uninspected airplane shelters. They spent an hour atop one of the shelters, recording measurements. After climbing down to inspect a second bunker, they were observed and detained by a large number of soldiers who forced them to lie face-down at gunpoint for about an hour until civilian police arrived.

“We hoped to confirm that the US has removed its nuclear bombs in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but our investigation was halted by the military,” Crane said. “The extra razor wire around the bunker, the near access to the jet runway, and the massive heavily armed military reaction to us indicates the U.S. nuclear weapons are here,” she concluded.

“Weapons Inspectors” Susan Crane and John LaForge first cut through chain link fence before entering German Air Force Base housing US nuclear weapons.
Then the “Weapons Inspectors” cut through and step over thick razor wire using a rug.

After having their identities confirmed by both military and civilian police, they were driven separately to the main gate. They waited in custody until their passports were returned, and then civilian police released Crane and LaForge at the gate.

For more information, visit nukewatchinfo.org and buechel-atombombenfrei.jimdo.com (German language).

—Reprinted with permission from the Nuclear Resister #189, Sept. 1, 2018, p.5. John LaForge contributed some reporting.

Filed Under: Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, US Bombs Out of Germany

October 15, 2018 by Nukewatch 2 Comments

Does Living Near Operating Reactors Cause Childhood Cancers? Nuclear regulators don’t want you to know

Fall Quarterly 2018
By Cindy Folkers, Beyond Nuclear

More than 60 studies have shown increases of childhood leukemia around nuclear facilities worldwide. Despite this finding, there has never been independent analysis in the US examining connections between childhood cancer and nuclear facilities. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) had directed the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to conduct such a study, but then withdrew funding, claiming publicly that it would be too expensive.

In fact, documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reveal that NRC employees had already determined the study would show no impact. Internal emails indicate that staff was presupposing a conclusion for which they had no evidence, demonstrated by statements like “even if you found something that looked like a relationship [between cancer and radiation], you wouldn’t know what to attribute it to,” and “most people realize that all the evidence shows you’re not going to find anything.” The evidence, however, had not yet been fully collected and examined.

And studies in Europe found elevated rates of leukemia among children 5 and under living near nuclear power plants.

Not protective and unaccountable
Pregnancy and unborn children are the most vulnerable to serious damage from radiation exposure. Beyond Nuclear International

While the NRC claims it protects public health, its radiation exposure standards fail to account fully for:

  • impacts on the placenta
  • impacts on fetal blood forming cells
  • impacts on fetal and embryonic organs
  • estrogenic impacts
  • disproportionate impacts on women
  • genetic impacts after the second generation
  • cumulative damage of repeated radiation exposure

NRC exposure data and computer modeling is designed to demonstrate compliance with the NRC’s regulations, but not to assess health impacts. The NRC has already stated numerous times that it believes low doses of radiation, the kind NRC claims its licensees are allowed to release, pose risks so low that health impacts may not be discernible. We don’t know if NRC’s claims of no discernible or attributable public health impact from nuclear power are actually true since no one has ever looked properly.

Pregnant women

Pregnancy and unborn children are the most vulnerable to serious damage from radiation exposure. Studies in Germany and France show an association between operating nuclear facilities and childhood cancer. However, given the demonstrable bias of the US NRC toward low doses having no health impact, it is essential that a US study go forward under the auspices of outside, independent experts, in order to examine what is happening in the US.

Ground-breaking study plans were threat to current health assumptions

Under the original and now canceled study, the NRC had tasked the NAS to use the most advanced methods in order to update the study the NRC currently uses to claim its reactors are safe. That study, published in 1990, had several shortcomings including the way the authors define and examine disease, assumptions about doses, location of cases, and who is examined.

The NAS was considering two study designs, one examining specifically children. This study type, dubbed by one expert as a case-control nested in a cohort, is very similar in basic design to studies conducted in France and Germany, which show increases in childhood leukemia around nuclear power facilities.

The NRC scuttled the NAS study in 2015, dubiously claiming it would have cost too much and taken too long. Upon examination, however, it is clear that the NAS study would have challenged the fundamentals of the NRC’s health assessment regime.

To date, most radiation studies have routinely suffered from a host of improper methodologies, making it impossible to discern health impacts. The NAS was considering using new ways of examining the issue by implementing a more detailed, more thorough, publicly shared research protocol.

The protocol included:
  • Making the study process and underlying assumptions public while the study was being conducted
  • Allowing public comment during the study process
  • Standardizing raw health data and making it available to researchers and the public
  • Standardizing and verifying pollutant data
  • Integrating independently collected pollutant and meteorological data
  • Examining and redoing the current health models
  • Tailoring health studies to local conditions
  • Creating new health models, specifically for the radionuclide carbon 14, which concentrates in fetal tissue more than maternal tissue.

This detailed and accessible protocol could have opened the NRC’s regulatory regime to exhaustive scrutiny, revealing just how inadequate it is for examining health impacts in the first place, never mind protecting public health. Further, with such careful research, NRC could have feared that the NAS study would point to an association between environmental radiation and cancer, as other studies have, although FOIA documents consisting mostly of internal emails did not specifically demonstrate this fear.

Mothballed study could be revived, made better

While the NAS child study design and protocol had much to recommend it, what’s unclear is whether it would have been free of all of the flaws that have historically plagued radiation health assessments. When the study was cancelled, independent experts still had concerns.

Historically, industry and radiation regulators have insisted that a causal link must be absolutely established between radiation and disease. For protection of the public, however, experts claim the standard should be a lower bar of association with disease. If this study moves forward under the NAS, it needs to relinquish concepts and methods that favor causation.

To date, researchers have started radiation health studies by presuming that there will be no impact because doses are too low—a contention that, in reality, remains scientifically unproven. Many studies reveal the opposite. Any new such research needs to ensure that the basis for health assessments is a focus on health outcomes, not dose models that are fraught with uncertainties.

While NRC licensees [like reactor operators] attempt to monitor environmental contamination, the NRC has never incorporated biological monitoring, which might prove useful after spike releases from various facility outages. There are several techniques that have been used in other health studies, which a revived cancer study could weave into any child or adult health assessment.

A truly independent and scientifically robust study would attempt to address these issues in addition to using the other enlightened protocols the NAS was considering. With the public process and protocol review suggested by the NAS for this now mothballed study, perhaps these remaining shortcomings would finally have been addressed as well. The NRC made sure that did not happen. However, according to Ourania Kosti, the NAS researcher coordinating the study, the NAS has left the door open to completing it. “I think it is important to update the findings of the 1990 study using better methodologies and information,” Kosti said. “This is the reason the Academies agreed to carry out the update. The Academies remain willing to do the study, if asked to.”

—Cindy Folkers is the radiation and health specialist at Beyond Nuclear, in Takoma Park MD.

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

October 15, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Japan Study Finds Rise in Cancer—Officials Deny Link to Fukushima

Fall Quarterly 2018
By Joseph Mangano

It is now seven years since the catastrophic reactor meltdowns at Fukushima, Japan, of March 2011. Enormous amounts of radioactive chemicals, including cesium, strontium, plutonium, and iodine were emitted into the air, and releases of the same toxins into the Pacific have actually never stopped, as workers struggle to contain over 100 cancer-causing chemicals.

When tiny metal particles of the chemical element iodine enter the body through breathing, food, or water, they attack the thyroid gland, which is critical to physical and mental development. The dangers of radioactive iodine are nothing new. A 1999 National Cancer Institute study estimated that iodine in atom bomb explosions in Nevada from 1951 to 1962 caused thyroid cancer in up to 212,000 US children born in the 1950s and 1960s.

Only one official study on Fukushima’s harm to the Japanese civilian population exists, a screening for thyroid cancer in 380,000 local children under the age of 18. In January, the journal Thyroid reported 187 cases after five years. A typical population of 380,000 children would produce 12 cases in five years.

Japanese officials deny the notion that the Fukushima disaster caused this high number. “It is difficult to think that the cases are related to radiation exposure,” said a committee in the Fukushima area. Skeptics claim that doctors are examining thyroid glands in the screening far more carefully than usual, which inflates the numbers. Others take exception to this claim and believe the findings are the result of exposure to Fukushima fallout.

One way to understand whether Fukushima is the cause of this huge increase is to look at child thyroid cancer data in other areas affected by the meltdown[s], where no special screening program was conducted. The United States is such a place. Fukushima fallout, driven by prevailing west-to-east winds, entered US air space across the nation days after the meltdown[s began]. Although Environmental Protection Agency data show radiation levels well above normal during that period, officials have dismissed the notion that [the public] might have been harmed, based on the belief that radiation exposures were too low.

Cancer cases from all US states are on the Centers for Disease Control website up to 2014. The four-year intervals 2007 to 2010 and 2011 to 2014, which represent periods before and after Fukushima, can be compared.

Results show that thyroid cancer rates rose:

—33 percent for children ages 0-14;

—13 percent for young adults;

—11 percent for middle-aged adults;

—7 percent for the elderly.

The number of US child thyroid cancer cases diagnosed jumped from 645 during the four years prior to Fukushima, to 854 during the four years following Fukushima. Again, no change has been made in the method of diagnosing thyroid cancer. The two ways, which have long been in use, include (1) doctor’s detection of a lump in a routine physical; and (2) the child reporting symptoms and consulting a physician. This is a real and significant increase.

A key additional finding is that the US thyroid cancer rate rose for all age groups after Fukushima. But the 33 percent increase among children far exceeds rises in young adults, middle-aged adults, and the elderly—exactly what would be expected if Fukushima were a factor, as, although radiation is harmful to people of all ages, it is most damaging to the fetus, infant, and child.

Denial of scientific fact is not new in the nuclear world, which has operated in a political fishbowl since the atomic era began in the 1940s. For years, as atom bombs were tested above ground, both [US] and Soviet officials denied any health threat to people from these explosions. The leaders knew the truth, as a 1963 treaty signed by President John F. Kennedy and Premier Nikita Khrushchev banned above-ground tests. But not until decades later, when the Cold War had ended, did the National Cancer Institute study peg the number of thyroid cancer cases in children caused by bomb fallout at up to 212,000.

For years after the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986, health officials denied any local humans had been harmed, other than the 31 rescue workers who died after being heavily exposed while putting out the raging chemical fire in the reactor. Even today, the World Health Organization attributed only 5,000 thyroid cancer cases among children and 9,000 additional deaths from all cancers to Chernobyl. In all likelihood, these figures are hugely under-estimated. Other estimates—reflected in the book Chernobyl by Alexey Yablokov published by the New York Academy of Sciences in 2009, which used 5,000 references written in the Slavic language—suggest about one million excess deaths, and that the percentage of local children who are healthy slipped from 80 percent to 20 percent after the meltdown.

The effort to cover up damage to humans from Fukushima—led by industry and its willing partners in government, including scientific researchers—has seven years under its belt. This cover-up follows the usual post-meltdown recipe, including:

—Official announcements immediately after the meltdown that nobody was harmed;

—An official study focused on children with thyroid cancer, a very rare disease, to minimize the estimated damage;

—An unexpectedly large number of cases reported in the study, but repeated denials that Fukushima was a cause;

—Failure to conduct other studies or to provide any assessment of the broader potential harm to young people, including infant mortality, low-weight births, premature births, birth defects, and non-thyroid child cancers—or to screen for diseases affecting adults.

But all of the bureaucratic and corporate obfuscation, which will undoubtedly continue in the future, will not calm public fears. After a meltdown, people can tell that cancer rates are high. They know that more children are sick. More of their pets or farm animals are sick or die. They may not be health research experts, but their understanding of the truth always trumps the deceitful practices of an industry that has harmed so many. The “peaceful atom” concept first propagated in the 1950s to calm a world frightened by the prospect of a nuclear war between the United States and the USSR, has never been compelling enough to offset the dramatic and recurring cost to human health caused by nuclear power.

Nor are the Japanese people buying it. Of the 54 reactors operating in Japan in 2011, all were closed. Only five have been restarted, but these will most likely be shut permanently in the face of Japanese public anger. It is time for public health researchers to serve the public, despite persistent attempts to discredit them. They must conduct the needed studies and ensure that the truth about the consequences of [reactor] meltdowns—as well as lesser and more commonplace events such as chronic radioactive emissions—is understood not as “acceptable risks” but as some of the foremost threats to public health.

—Joseph Mangano is Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project and author of Mad Science, and Low-Level Radiation and Immune System Damage. He wrote this article for The Washington Spectator.

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

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • …
  • 98
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Facebook

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • 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
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • 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

© 2021 · Nukewatch