Blog
-
-
This new version of False Promises produced by NIRS examines many of the false propaganda claims made by the nuclear industry and carefully rebuts each one, supplemented with extensive footnotes. You’ll find information on nuclear safety, economics, radioactive waste, sustainable energy, radiation and health and much more. You can download it free here. Printed copies are available from NIRS for $15 (includes priority mail postage and handling). Send a check to NIRS, 6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912.
Update
-
The Department of Energy has issued a solicitation for applications for its loan guarantee program authorized by Congress in late 2007. This solicitation is for $30.5 billion in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees, and includes $18.5 billion for new atomic reactors, $2 billion for front-end nuclear fuel cycle facilities (uranium enrichment plant), and $10 billion for renewable energy, energy efficiency and transmission projects. You can read the reactor solicitation here; the fuel cycle solicitation here; and the renewables/efficiency/transmission solicitation here.
Update
-
-
-
-
An important new article from Rocky Mountain Institute: The Nuclear Illusion by Amory Lovins and Imran Sheikh. “Nuclear power is continuing its decades-long collapse in the global marketplace because it’s grossly uncompetitive, unneeded, and obsolete—so hopelessly uneconomic that one needn’t debate whether it’s clean and safe; it weakens electric reliability and national security; and it worsens climate change compared with devoting the same money and time to more effective options.” Read this to understand the reality of energy in the 21st century, and make sure your elected representatives at every level of government read it too.
Update
-
Should the U.S. be a dump for foreign nuclear waste? Factsheet from HEAL Utah on EnergySolutions’ proposed import of 20,000 tons of radioactive waste from Italy.
Update
-
A major new report on the French reprocessing program from the International Panel on Fissile Materials finds that it does not reduce volume of radioactive waste and would have to be half its current cost to be economically competitive with storage of the waste, thus undercutting the Bush administration’s major arguments for reprocessing.
Link
-