Here is a good call from Lorna Salzman of NY Greens to immediately shut down Indian Point Reactor, less than 50 miles from NYC, shut down all nukes near earthquake faults, and shut down of all nuclear power in the next year. I would only add to repeal Price -Anderson Nuclear Liability law. It is not up for renewal until 2025, but I wonder if it is repealable before it comes up for renewal? Anyone know? Don -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [TrueGreen_NoNukes] Fwd: No Nukes national campaign and the next election Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:18:33 -0800 From: Abalone Alliance Clearinghouse <ABALONE@ENERGY-NET.ORG> Reply-To: TrueGreen_NoNukes@yahoogroups.com To: TrueGreen_NoNukes@yahoogroups.com -------- Original Message -------- Subject: No Nukes national campaign and the next election Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:37:40 -0400 From: Lorna Salzman <lsalzman1@verizon.net> To: Lorna Salzman <lsalzman1@verizon.net> Dear No Nukes people and those on the verge: Many people are now eager to revive the formidable anti-nuclear movement of the 1970s, which was able to prevent new reactor construction since 1974, though not that in other countries. Of immediate and justifiable concern is the shutdown of existing reactors and protection of the public from the radioactive fallout that has already reached the west coast. Interviews with scientists, policy experts and investigative journalists prove beyond a doubt that operating reactors present a grave ongoing threat to the public due to inadequate government regulation and oversight, the inability to predict or prevent reactor and human failure accident, emergency planning that disregards the full consequences of serious accident, and the abdication by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, congress and the president of their responsibilities to put safety ahead of their obeisance to the nuclear industry. This is not new. As part of the anti-nuclear movement from the early 1970s, I learned that, like the Japanese government, our own government has continued to ignore expert scientific evidence and advice from its own agencies, and, when confronted with facts on the lack of safety and the inherent hazards of nuclear power, immediately denies the facts and suppresses any studies or information that might reveal the truth to the public. This is still true today. The Indian Point reactors 25 north of NYC, located on the Ramapo fault, have a 10 mile emergency planning zone but there is no plan dealing with potential exposure of the NYC population despite the recent announcement by the head of the NRC regarding Fukushima that residents out to 50 miles should evacuate. The whole NYC water supply lies to the west, within the "radiation-shed" of Indian Point. Forcing full shutdown of operating reactors must be the first order of business. There is sufficient excess electric capacity nationwide to compensate for all the power provided by all these reactors. Enhanced by serious energy efficiency measures and conservation (also needed to mitigate global warming) we can easily provide for an extra margin of power. Our next concern must be a political and electoral one. Right now there is a bipartisan "Washington consensus" on nuclear power, headed by Pres. Obama: that the nuclear reactors must continue to operate but under a new "improved" safety regime. Our government is asking us to trust them to protect us, to pass tougher regulations and beef up safety standards....even though they have FAILED TO DO THIS SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE NUCLEAR POWER ERA. Putting aside the inherent and irremediable risks of nuclear power, they are now trying to convince us that some tweaking here and there will suffice to protect us from a Fukushima-size catastrophe. This is the BIG LIE. There is no such thing as an infallible technology or human being. It is, as we all have seen, impossible to identify all possible causes of an accident or component failure. Past experience is no guarantee or proof. And the regulators continue to be part of the problem. There is no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor...except the one 93 million miles away. It is important to understand that safety and health standards for nuclear reactors were not developed a priori, that is, before reactors were designed. They were developed afterwards, to insure that they would not interfere with or raise the costs of constructing nuclear reactors. Every single standard in existence was developed using a cost/benefit ratio based on a specific dollar value of a human life. Any component or regulation that would result in exceeding that cost is ELIMINATED. The protection of the industry itself is the sole concern of the NRC. You can be sure that any new safety regulation will be developed to insure that it does not raise the industry's costs of repair or retrofitting and cut into its profits. In light of the Washington conspiracy to protect the nuclear industry, the impossibility of predicting or protecting against reactor or human failure, the lack of any plan that could protect the public from radiation exposure and environmental contamination, the proven hazards of low level radiation for human health, the extent of IRREVERSIBLE devastation of land, infrastructure, water and crops that will result from a serious accident (admitted by the government itself in its updated WASH-740 report that was suppressed for years), and the countless possible causes of reactor failure, it is not folly but insanity to allow this technology to continue to operate for one more day. Recall that the Brown's Ferry fire that almost destroyed the entire safety instrumentation of the reactor was caused by a workman's CANDLE as he explored the cable spreading area. This cause of an accident was not included in the government's own "fault tree" studies of possible accident-initating events. Nor can all the other causes be identified. What recourse do we have even if a few reactors, such as Indian Point, are shut but the hundreds or so remaining reactors are allowed to continue operation? Our only recourse is at election time. We must right now predict the response of congress and of the Democratic Party in particular, which will try, feebly, vainly, and insincerely, to convince us that we must re-install them in control of Congress in 2012. In order to respond, we need to be ready: not to accede out of wishful thinking like that which elected Obama but to prepare a list of unconditional non-negotiable demands. Unless our congressional representatives agree to support and work to implement these, we must tell them that they WILL NOT GET OUR VOTE, no matter how repugnant their opponent in the election is. With this in mind, I would like to suggest the basic list of demands and ask that groups and activists work to persuade their members and friends to support them. 1)Immediate closure of all reactors that are located on or near earthquake faults, as well as all other reactors that lack demonstrably effective evacuation plans out to a 50 mile radius; 2)Enforcement by the NRC of the existing rule that limits the amount of spent fuel that can be stored at each reactor (this rule has been in continual violation for years and spent fuel pools now contain many times the amount of fuel rods and radioactivity allowed by law; each American reactor spent fuel pool contains several times more radioactivity than any of the Fukushima plants); 3) Removal of excess spent fuel rods, and eventually all the others, to secure dry cask storage with multiple layers of defense against terrorism, earthquakes, fires, floods, airplane crashes, bombs, etc. 4)Imposition of mandatory federal energy efficiency standards to reduce energy demand; 5)Acceleration of distributed renewable energy, mainly wind power, through incentives, loans and public investment, accompanied by a carbon tax on all fossil fuels, with dividends returned to citizens, so as to level the playing field for renewable energy development; 6)Prompt termination of all government subsidies, tax breaks, and loan guarantees for nuclear power and fossil fuels; 7)Commencement of a rapid phase-out of all other operating reactors, to be completed promptly and safely within one year; 8)Prohibition against licensing of new reactors or license extensions of existing ones; You will notice that items 4,5,and 6 are also necessary for reducing CO2 emissions and mitigating global warming. This is a list of what I consider the bottom line demands we must make as a citizenry to our elected officials. I also would like to advise those of you who agree with these not to argue or waste time with those who may go along with one or more items but are not yet willing to shut down the whole nuclear enterprise. Most of them are not ready to change their minds but with time and more information may come to that conclusion on their own. In the meantime, reach out and talk to those who now understand the gravity of the problem and who are not ideologically or politically beholden to the Democrats or the nuclear industry. These people are our potential constituency and we need to contact them quickly. LS Lorna Salzman lsalzman1@verizon.net We are already fighting World War III and I am sorry to say we are winning. It is the war against the earth - Raymond Dasmann Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction - Blaise Pascal "If we don't change direction we'll end up where we're headed" ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1498/3533 - Release Date: 03/27/11