 |
|
|
| | | published Friday, February 03, 2012 | 13 Views :: 0 Comments |
Tell the Department of Energy not to put nuclear bombs in power plants!
Jan. 3, 2012
The Department of Energy (DOE) is currently accepting public comments on the scope of their upcoming Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) regarding disposing of surplus plutonium. The DOE has already held it's only public hearing for this SPEIS, but you can still make a comment until March 12th, 2012. Read the comment that ANA submitted at this hearing here.
Submit your own comment!
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, February 03, 2012 | 22 Views :: 0 Comments |
The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, in collaboration with our allies at the Ploughshares Fund, the Arms Control Association, and the Union of Concerned Scientists present two new fact sheets on nuclear weapons funding.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, February 02, 2012 | 44 Views :: 0 Comments |
for immediate release: Thursday, January 26, 2012
for further information, contact: Bob Schaeffer: 239-395-6773 Katherine Fuchs: 202-544-0217, ext. 2503 local contacts listed at end of advisory
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future report released today received mixed reviews from groups that monitor sites where large quantities of radioactive waste are stored. The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) said major flaws in the report include the Commission’s “failure to advocate prompt removal of commercial spent fuel from reactor cooling pools with placement in hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS) to safeguard commercial spent fuel at nuclear power plants.” ANA and hundreds of community groups had told the Commission that HOSS could protect the heavily reactive material for the decades needed to develop a scientifically sound and publicly acceptable waste disposal program.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Wednesday, February 01, 2012 | 31 Views :: 0 Comments |
The following piece contains a quote from Don Hancock, longtime ANA members and Director of the Southwest Research & Information Center's Nuclear Waste program. Don has been watchdogging nuclear waste "disposal" at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico from the beginning of the disposal program.
Feb. 1, 2012
By John FleckFrom the Albuquerque Journal
The New Mexico Environment Department on Tuesday rejected a federal proposal to begin mixing highly radioactive waste among the low-dose waste that makes up the bulk of the material at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad.
But the decision leaves the door open for the issue to be reconsidered.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, January 31, 2012 | 63 Views :: 0 Comments |
For immediate release: January 27, 2012
For further information, contact: Dr. Arjun Makhijani (301) 270-5500, cell (301) 509-6843
Commission Recognizes French Style Reprocessing Will Increase Proliferation Risks Without Solving Waste Problem
Progress on Consent-Based Approach to Geologic Repository Siting
Takoma Park, Maryland -- Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D., President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, today commented on some of the recommendations of the final report of the Presidential Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America’s Nuclear Future, released yesterday. The commission was created to address U.S. nuclear waste issues after the Obama administration cancelled the Yucca Mountain program.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, January 31, 2012 | 42 Views :: 0 Comments |
31 JANUARY 2012
By: Seth P. Tuler, Eugene A. Rosa, and Thomas Webler
From the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Article Highlights: - The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future endeavored to engage experts and the general public in developing policies for managing spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste.
- Despite an expressed desire to serve as a model of participatory processes, the Commission provided limited opportunities for public input, influence, and involvement.
- To be successful, future decision-making processes for managing spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste will need to be even more transparent, inclusive, and respectful of public participation.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, January 31, 2012 | 58 Views :: 0 Comments |
January 29, 2012 By LeRoy Moore and Robert Del Tredici
Whether to build the Jefferson Parkway or to turn Rocky Flats into a playground, the determining factor should not be commercial or residential development. The determining factor should be hot particles of plutonium.
A hot particle of plutonium is one that can lodge in air sacs of a lung or be moved via blood elsewhere in the organism. Wherever it resides in the body it irradiates surrounding tissue. A single particle of plutonium can damage more than 10,000 cells within its range.
Nobel chemist Glenn Seaborg, who discovered plutonium in 1941, called it "fiendishly toxic, even in small amounts." Physicist Jeremy Bernstein recently declared plutonium "the world's most dangerous element."
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, January 31, 2012 | 88 Views :: 0 Comments |
Press Conference Advisory: Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 9:15 am Rotunda, Roundhouse at the corner of Old Santa Fe Trail and Paseo de Peralta Topic: Map Documenting Community Water Concerns to be Released as Part of Legislative Day for People of Faith Concerned about Clean Air, Water and Earth Contact: Joan Brown, Partnership for Earth Spirituality 505-266-6966 (Albuquerque), joankansas@swcp.com Joni Arends, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety 505-986-1973 (Santa Fe), jarends@nuclearactive.org A map documenting community and people of faith concerns for water will be released Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 9:15 in the Rotunda of the State Capitol. The document release is part of a Legislative Day for People of Faith Concerned for Water, Land, Air and People. The project was initiated by people of faith and communities concerned about water and funded by the Catholic Sisters of Mercy – Northeast Community.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, January 31, 2012 | 53 Views :: 0 Comments |
Jan 31, 2012 By John Fleck Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer
It seems to have been sometime during 2007 that the wheels started coming off of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s proposed new plutonium lab.
National Nuclear Security Administration officials were publicly telling congressional auditors they thought the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement project was under control. They said the $800 million price was based on “reliable cost estimates,” and the project was not in danger of heading down the agency’s well-worn path of cost overruns and schedule delays.
Internally, though, there were signs of trouble. The lab’s draft safety plan for the project was “substandard,” NNSA said. By February 2008, the cost estimate had more than doubled to $2 billion, and has continued to climb.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, January 23, 2012 | 178 Views :: 0 Comments |
January 20, 2012
By Todd Jacobson From the Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor
With less than a month remaining before the Obama Administration’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget release, Los Alamos National Laboratory officials are bracing for what is expected to be a massive cut to its biggest project: the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility. The multi-billion-dollar project that will replace the lab’s aging Chemistry and Metallurgy Research facility has come under fire in recent months, both from Congress and from government watchdog groups like the Project on Government Oversight and the Los Alamos Study Group. Although lab and NNSA officials haven’t said anything publicly about the project, lab officials are privately expecting the worst when it comes to funding for the project, which is estimated to cost between $3.7 and $5.8 billion. “We’re not expecting funding for CMRR,” one official told NW&M Monitor. “Right now, we’re planning to go without.”
|
| read more.. |
|
|
 |
|