 |
|
|
| | | published Monday, November 17, 2008 | 49 Views :: 0 Comments |
The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) objects to the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)’s support for reprocessing of high level radioactive waste. As stated in the draft PEIS, GNEP intends to provide nuclear power that is safe, secure and economical while “reducing the impacts associated with spent nuclear fuel disposal and reducing proliferation risks.” ANA, however, finds that the GNEP proposal would actually exacerbate the inherent proliferation, cost, safety, waste, and security risks associated with nuclear power.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, November 17, 2008 | 51 Views :: 0 Comments |
COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Reprocessing spent nuclear fuel too risky
Saturday, November 15, 2008 3:20 AM
By Bob Alvarez
The
push for new nuclear reactors became a top-tier issue in the
presidential race. Yet one aspect of the debate received little
attention: reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. This issue is especially
relevant to Ohio, where the U.S. Energy Department has considered
locating such a facility near Portsmouth.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, November 14, 2008 | 122 Views :: 0 Comments |
For use in the public comment period on DOE’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Nov.-Dec. 2008
Compiled by Kevin Kamps, Radioactive Waste Watchdog at Beyond Nuclear
For more information: kevin@beyondnuclear.org, www.beyondnuclear.org, (301) 270-2209x1
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, November 10, 2008 | 156 Views :: 0 Comments |
To the Editor:
The Department of Energy (DOE) has released a report recommending that, after a 30 year hiatus, the United States should restart reprocessing of nuclear waste under the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). The report, titled Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, does not provide any economic or environmental analysis and does not mention the security risks of reprocessing.
The reality is that reprocessing poses a threat to both local communities and to global security. Right now DOE is holding hearings around the country and considering comments from the public on the proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). We need to be telling DOE that, instead of pursuing this environmentally destructive, dangerous, and exorbitantly expensive $700 billion program, they should store nuclear waste at reactor sites and safeguard it from terrorist attack.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, November 06, 2008 | 128 Views :: 1 Comments |
For Immediate Release
Nov. 6, 2008
Contact: Andrea Shipley
(208) 344-9161
(208) 514-8713 Cell
Email: ashipley@snakeriveralliance.org
Elmore County Planners: Reject AEHI Nuke Plant
Elmore County officials delivered a serious blow to developers of a proposed nuclear reactor near Mountain Home Wednesday night, recommending against rezoning more than 1,300 acres of Snake River farmland for use as the reactor site.
This is a huge victory for the people of Elmore County who spoke so eloquently and forcefully to defend Elmore County from this outlandish nuclear reactor scheme,” Snake River Alliance Executive Director Andrea Shipley said. “We congratulate them for their passionate defense of their cherished way of life and the land and water that is so vital to these communities and to all of Idaho.”
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, October 20, 2008 | 1 Views :: 0 Comments |
Judith Mohling,
Friday, October 17, 2008
Is a revival of nuclear power an answer? No, for many reasons. Here are two of them.
Nuclear power is not democratic. The entire nuclear cycle, from uranium mining, to nuclear power or weapons production damages the health of communities. It's all lethal.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, October 16, 2008 | 597 Views :: 1 Comments |
The Department of Energyís (DOE) proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), a program to restart nuclear waste reprocessing in the United States, poses a threat to local communities and to global security. Instead of pursuing this environmentally destructive, dangerous, and exorbitantly expensive GNEP program, DOE should store nuclear waste at reactor sites and safeguard it from terrorist attack.
The analysis provided in the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) is appallingly inadequate. Despite its legal mandate to analyze the full socio-economic and environmental impacts of GNEP, this document this PEIS does not include a complete life cycle cost analysis, fully addressing environmental or nonproliferation impacts. Furthermore, it inadequately addresses the full extent of health impacts from reprocessing.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, October 16, 2008 | 540 Views :: 0 Comments | |
| | | published Wednesday, October 15, 2008 | 585 Views :: 0 Comments |
Press Release Template for Organizations to use regarding Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
____________________ opposes the reprocessing of nuclear waste under the Bush administration’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), as recommended by the recent Department of Energy (DOE) report, entitled Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement [PEIS] for Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.
Download Document in Word: GNEP Template for Press Release.doc
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Wednesday, October 08, 2008 | 548 Views :: 0 Comments |
Separating plutonium under GNEP would increase the production and stockpiles of nuclear weapons usable materials. Spent fuel that has not been reprocessed is considered “self protecting” because it is highly radioactive. Separated plutonium is a fine powder, and approximately 18 lbs. are required to make a bomb.
|
| read more.. |
|
|
 |
|