August 2012 - Sustainability - list.sfgreens.org

[Sustain] Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
by Michael Boyd 16 Aug '12

16 Aug '12

LinkedIn ------------ SF Greens, I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn. - Michael Michael Boyd President at CAlifornians for Renewable Energy, Inc. (CARE) San Francisco Bay Area Confirm that you know Michael Boyd: https://www.linkedin.com/e/ogd7bm-h5y360gm-2k/isd/8259055539/YWz6HXmx/?hs=f… -- You are receiving Invitation to Connect emails. Click to unsubscribe: http://www.linkedin.com/e/ogd7bm-h5y360gm-2k/vPkz3rJrofFK9TUfbVIBwHe9TsHJrv… (c) 2012 LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA.

1 0

Re: [Sustain] Fwd: NRC RULING SUPPORTS MOTHERS FOR PEACE AND 23 OTHER GROUPS
by Don Eichelberger 07 Aug '12

07 Aug '12

Yay, Jane and Mothers, congratulations! Finally, I hope, the beginning of the end for nukes. I am always amazed how long it can take to come up with such logical decisions, when they do so at all. I don't see San Onofre mentioned in the order, so this decision will not affect a restart, I guess, although lots of other stuff should keep it down. Still, this is a victory that has been long in coming, so Bask, for a while, and prepare for the next round. Thanks to all for their hard work, Don On 8/7/2012 2:30 PM, Lucy J Swanson wrote: > > >> *From: *Swanson Jane <janeslo(a)kcbx.net <mailto:janeslo@kcbx.net>> >> *Subject: **NRC RULING SUPPORTS MOTHERS FOR PEACE AND 23 OTHER GROUPS* >> *Date: *August 7, 2012 2:27:01 PM PDT >> *To: *Jane Swanson <janeslo(a)me.com <mailto:janeslo@me.com>>, Lucy >> Jane Swanson <janeslo(a)kcbx.net <mailto:janeslo@kcbx.net>> >> >> Press Release, August 7, 2012 >> >> San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace >> >> For immediate release >> >> Contacts: >> >> Jane Swansonjaneslo(a)me.com <mailto:janeslo@me.com> >> >> (805) 595-2605 >> >> Linda Seeleylindaseeley(a)gmail.com <mailto:lindaseeley@gmail.com> >> >> (805) 234-1769 >> >> *NRC FREEZES ALL NUCLEAR REACTOR CONSTRUCTION & OPERATING LICENSES IN >> U.S.* >> >> */Decision Follows 24 Groups’ June Petition in Wake of Major Waste >> Confidence Rule Decision; Most Reactor Projects Already Stymied by >> Bad Economics and Cheaper Fuel Alternatives/* >> >> *WASHINGTON, D.C. – August 7, 2012 –*The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory >> Commission (NRC) acted today to put a hold on at least 19 final >> reactor licensing decisions – nine construction & operating licenses >> (COLS), eight license renewals, one operating license, and one early >> site permit – in response to the landmark Waste Confidence Rule >> decision of June 8^th by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. >> >> The NRC action was sought in a June 18, 2012 petition filed by 24 >> groups urging the NRC to respond to the court ruling by freezing >> final licensing decisions until it has completed a rulemaking action >> on the environmental impacts of highly radioactive nuclear waste in >> the form of spent, or ‘used’, reactor fuel storage and disposal. >> >> In hailing the NRC action, the groups also noted that most of the >> U.S. reactor projects were already essentially sidetracked by the >> huge problems facing the nuclear industry, including an inability to >> control runaway costs, and the availability of far less expensive >> energy alternatives. >> >> Diane Curran, an attorney representing some of the groups in the >> Court of Appeals case, said: *This Commission decision halts all >> final licensing decisions -- but not the licensing proceedings >> themselves -- until NRC completes a thorough study of the >> environmental impacts of storing and disposing of spent nuclear >> fuel. That study should have been done years ago, but NRC just kept >> kicking the can down the road. When the Federal Appeals Court >> ordered NRC to stop and consider the impacts of generating spent >> nuclear fuel for which it has found no safe means of disposal, the >> agency could choose to appeal the decision by August 22nd or choose >> to do the serious work of analyzing the environmental impacts over >> the next few years. With today’s Commission decision, we are hopeful >> that the agency will undertake the serious work.” * >> >> San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace spokesperson Jane Swanson noted >> that, *“Mothers for Peace in 1973, as part of its challenge of the >> original operating license for the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, >> argued that the Atomic Energy Commission, predecessor of the NRC, >> should not allow the generation of radioactive wastes without knowing >> how to isolate those wastes from the environment. Now, 39 years >> later, the NRC has been forced by the federal court to acknowledge >> this necessity. Future actions by the agency will determine whether >> public confidence is enhanced or further weakened. ”* >> >> Lou Zeller, executive director of Blue Ridge Environmental Defense >> League, another petitioner to the Court, said: said: * “It appears >> that the Commissioners have, at least initially, grasped the >> magnitude of the Court’s ruling and we are optimistic that it will >> set up a fundamentally transparent, fair process under the National >> Environmental Policy Act to examine the serious environmental impacts >> of spent nuclear fuel storage and disposal prior to licensing or >> relicensing nuclear reactors.”* >> >> Former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford said:*“It is important to >> recognize that the reactors awaiting construction licenses weren't >> going to be built anytime soon even without the Court decision or >> today's NRC action. Falling demand, cheaper alternatives and runaway >> nuclear costs had doomed their near term prospects well before the >> recent Court decision. Important though the Court decision is >> in modifying the NRC's historic >> push-the-power-plants-but-postpone-the-problems approach to generic >> safety and environmental issues, it cannot be blamed for ongoing >> descent into fiasco of the bubble once known as ‘the nuclear >> renaissance’.”* >> >> In June, the following groups filed the petition with the NRC: >> >> ·Beyond Nuclear, Inc. (intervenor in Fermi COL proceeding, Calvert >> Cliffs COL proceeding, and Davis-Besse license renewal proceeding; >> potential intervenor in Grand Gulf COL and Grand Gulf license renewal >> proceedings); >> >> ·Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Inc. and chapters (“BREDL”) >> (intervenor in Bellefonte COL proceeding and North Anna COL >> proceeding; previously sought intervention in W.S. Lee COL proceeding); >> >> ·Citizens Allied for Safe Energy, Inc. (former intervenor in Turkey >> Point COL proceeding); >> >> ·Citizens Environmental Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Inc. >> (intervenor in Fermi COL proceeding and Davis-Besse license renewal >> proceeding); >> >> ·Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination (intervenor in >> Fermi COL proceeding); >> >> ·Don’t Waste Michigan, Inc. (intervenor in Fermi COL proceeding and >> Davis-Besse license renewal proceeding); >> >> ·Ecology Party of Florida (intervenor in Levy COL proceeding); >> >> ·Eric Epstein (potential intervenor in Bell Bend COL proceeding); >> >> ·Friends of the Earth, Inc. (potential intervenor in reactor >> licensing proceedings throughout U.S.); >> >> ·Friends of the Coast, Inc. (intervenor in Seabrook license renewal >> proceeding); >> >> ·Green Party of Ohio (intervenor in Davis-Besse license renewal >> proceeding); >> >> ·Dan Kipnis (intervenor in Turkey Point proceeding); >> >> ·National Parks Conservation Association, Inc. (intervenor in Turkey >> Point COL proceeding); >> >> ·Mark Oncavage (intervenor in Turkey Point COL proceeding); >> >> ·Missouri Coalition for the Environment, Inc. (Petitioner in >> Callaway license renewal proceeding; intervenor in suspended Callaway >> COL proceeding) >> >> ·New England Coalition, Inc. (intervenor in Seabrook license renewal >> proceeding); >> >> ·North Carolina Waste Reduction and Awareness Network, Inc. >> (admitted as an Intervenor in now-closed Shearon Harris COL proceeding); >> >> ·Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Inc. (intervenor in >> Calvert Cliffs COL proceeding and Levy COL proceeding); >> >> ·Public Citizen, Inc. (intervenor in South Texas COL proceeding; >> admitted as intervenor in now-closed Comanche Peak COL proceeding; >> potential intervenor in South Texas license renewal proceeding); >> >> ·San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, Inc. (intervenor in Diablo Canyon >> license renewal proceeding); >> >> ·Sierra Club, Inc. (Michigan Chapter) (intervenor in Fermi COL >> proceeding); >> >> ·Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Inc. (intervenor in Watts Bar >> Unit 2 OL proceeding, Turkey Point COL proceeding, Bellefonte COL >> proceeding; former intervenor in Bellefonte CP proceeding); >> >> ·Southern Maryland CARES, Inc. (Citizens Alliance for Renewable >> Energy Solutions) (intervenor in Calvert Cliffs COL proceeding); >> >> ·Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (“SEED”) Coalition, >> Inc. (intervenor in South Texas COL proceeding; admitted as >> intervenor in now-closed Comanche Peak COL proceeding; potential >> intervenor in South Texas license renewal proceeding). >> >> The 24 groups that sponsored the June 18^th petition will strategize >> in September regarding next steps. >> >> On June 8^th , the Court threw out the NRC rule that permitted >> licensing and re-licensing of nuclear reactors based on the >> supposition that (a) the NRC will find a way to dispose of spent >> reactor fuel to be generated by reactors at some time in the future >> when it becomes “necessary” and (b) in the mean time, spent fuel can >> be stored safely at reactor sites. >> >> The Court noted that, after decades of failure to site a repository, >> including twenty years of working on the now-abandoned Yucca Mountain >> repository, the NRC “has no long-term plan other than hoping for a >> geologic repository.” Therefore it is possible that spent fuel will >> be stored at reactor sites “on a permanent basis.” Under the >> circumstances, the NRC must examine the environmental consequences of >> failing to establish a repository when one is needed. >> >> The Court also rejected NRC’s decision minimizing the risks of leaks >> or fires from spent fuel stored in reactor pools during future >> storage, because the NRC had not demonstrated that these future >> impacts would be insignificant. The Court found that past experience >> with pool leaks was not an adequate predictor of future experience. >> It also concluded that the NRC had not shown that catastrophic fires >> in spent fuel pools were so unlikely that their risks could be ignored. >> >> *_MEDIA CONTACT:_*Alex Frank, (703) 276-3264 or >> afrank(a)hastingsgroup.com <mailto:afrank@hastingsgroup.com>. >> >> */The NRC Memorandum and Order can be downloaded >> at/*http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/licensing/wasteconfruling8712.pdf >> >> >> >> > -- Don Eichelberger Occupy Bohemian Grove 2012 www.occupybohemiangrove.com more info at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/03/01/18708527.php Shut down nuclear power www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/ www.energy-net.org More about me at www.Facebook.com/Don Eichelberger Check my original music at www.MySpace.com/donnyfix "The government of an exclusive company of merchants is, perhaps, the worst of all governments for any country whatever." Adam Smith, "Wealth of Nations" Ch.7

2 1

[Sustain] IMPORTANT: CleanPowerSF FINAL VOTE IN SEPTEMBER
by Eric Brooks 07 Aug '12

07 Aug '12

Hi all, The coalition championing CleanPowerSF has finally succeeded in getting the SF Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) to make a local buildout of hundreds of megawatts of renewables and efficiency the essential foundation of the program. The study and bid preparation work for this buildout will be completed by the end of 2012. (See attached the press release announcing the buildout victory and the Local Clean Energy Alliance estimate for the thousands of local jobs that this buildout will generate.) This program will run San Francisco on over 50% clean electricity by the end of the decade. IMPORTANT: FINAL CleanPowerSF VOTE IN SEPTEMBER On Wednesday September 12, legislation enacting both a small startup energy purchasing contract with Shell Energy North America, and approving the larger buildout program, will be introduced in the Board of Supervisors Budget & Finance Committee. In early September prior to that Budget and Finance hearing, we will need every possible organization and individual to contact the Board and Mayor to support the legislation. If the legislation is approved, the program will at last begin in early 2013! We are almost there. But we will need a STRONG uprising of community support. (Especially in light of the fact that a PG&E PR Executive was just made the head of the San Francisco Democratic Party.) I will post again soon with an action alert for supporting the legislation. cheers Eric Brooks Campaign Coordinator Our City http://ourcitysf.org

1 0