Tag Archives: ALEC

Nuclear Newsreel, Tuesday, May 13, 2014

The existing Turkey Point facility consists of two reactors, two gas/oil plants and one combined cycle natural gas plant. But FPL is considering adding two new reactors to the site.

The existing Turkey Point facility consists of two reactors, two gas/oil plants and one combined cycle natural gas plant. But FPL is considering adding two new reactors to the site.

A hearing is being held today in Florida on whether FPL should be allowed to build two new reactors at its Turkey Point site near Miami. The hearing is for a state permit, FPL would still need a license from the NRC to be able to build. And FPL has said it hasn’t decided yet whether it wants to build the reactors, which would be expected to cost about $18 Billion. An FPL spokesperson made the astonishing claim that the reactors would save $170 billion in fuel costs over natural gas over the next 60 years; we guess FPL alone has the crystal ball that can predict natural gas prices over that period, not to mention its certainty that the unbuilt reactors would receive a license extension to operate that long.

And, of course, the fuel cost savings over solar, wind and energy efficiency, the alternatives being promoted by Turkey Point opponents in The Sunshine State, would be a negative number. Then there’s that little matter of climate change, with Miami being one of the most vulnerable cities in the U.S. to climate-induced disaster.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Koch Brothers, fossil fuel interests take on renewables, and that benefits nuclear industry too

Koch Industries headquarters. Their anti-renewables, pro-coal campaign could leave the sky as black as their building...

Koch Industries headquarters. Their anti-renewables, pro-coal campaign could leave the sky as black as their building…

We’ve written a lot in recent weeks about the nuclear industry’s recent change in focus, primarily through astroturf front groups like Nuclear Matters and corporate funded pseudo-environmental groups like Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (and, for good reason, we’ll add the Breakthrough Institute–which unlike the others is not industry funded–with its recent absurd diatribe on nuclear power and climate), from building new reactors to trying to prevent the shutdown of uneconomic, not to mention unsafe, aging existing reactors.

The nuclear industry is acting out of self-interest, of course, and they say that if clean renewable energy gets in the way, then it has to be pared back. But most nuclear utilities are at least somewhat invested in renewables themselves, and those are perhaps not their top target. As we’ve noted, what they really want is some form of electricity re-regulation or other actions that will allow them to force expensive nuclear power on ratepayers, whether or not renewables, and currently natural gas, also continue to operate. (For its part, Exelon today came up with a new approach to protecting its reactors; it wants to buy the DC-based utility Pepco, which has no reactors and much of its operations are in regulated markets, which would in essence force Pepco ratepayers to make up for the losses piled up by Exelon’s nuclear reactors).

But it’s important to understand this in a larger context, and that is that fossil fuel interests–especially coal–have many of the same problems as nuclear interests do. Continue reading

Nuclear Newsreel, Friday, April 18, 2014

rooftopsolarIt’s Friday! Time for an abbreviated, and mostly optimistic, Nuclear Newsreel…

Department of Energy workers yesterday made it far enough into the WIPP site to reach the contaminated area, according to the Associated Press. However, the workers were unable to remain deep in the site long enough to determine what caused the February and March radiation releases. The contaminated area is believed to be “panel 7.” As AP describes it, “Waste at the plant is stored in panels, which are a series of rooms cut out of underground salt beds. Five of those panels are full and have already been sealed. Panel 6 is full but has not yet been sealed. Panel 7 is the current active storage area. Crews made it to both Panels 6 and 7, and they found the contamination in Panel 7.”

Clean Energy

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman admits he thought the idea that the wind and sun could be major energy players was “hippie-dippy wishful thinking.” No more. With solar prices plunging and renewables gaining worldwide, Krugman now says de-carbonizing the planet is a realistic goal–and, it can be done without harm to the U.S. or world’s economies. Okay, probably most GreenWorld readers already knew that; but when the concept begins reaching the mainstream (though Krugman, despite his excellent work over the years, unfortunately remains somewhat left of the mainstream), that’s when you know the concept is not only valid, it will quickly become accepted wisdom. Krugman’s entire piece here is quite optimistic on the world’s ability to avoid the worst of climate change.

Continue reading

Nuclear Newsreel, Thursday, March 27, 2014

A Nuclear Newsreel today focused mostly on clean energy developments…Note: GreenWorld will not publish tomorrow, March 28, 2014 (the 35th anniversary of the Three Mile Island accident). We’ll be back on Monday, March 31 with a special Opening Day essay! Watch for it.

Another one bites the dust. A major investor drops out of proposed Finnish-Russian nuclear project. Doesn’t anyone want a piece of this thing? Apparently not anyone with economic sense.

The Department of Energy is dangerously close to approving the release of some radioactive material into the general marketplace. In response, NIRS has launched a new campaign aimed at encouraging DOE to make permanent an existing moratorium on such practices. You can take action to encourage DOE here.

First, it was Goldman Sachs. Then Morgan Stanley. Now a new report from Citigroup agrees: the solar revolution is here. The report “notes that nuclear and coal are structurally disadvantaged because both technologies are viewed as uncompetitive on cost. Environmental regulations are making coal even pricier, and the aging nuclear fleet in the US is facing plant shutdowns due to the challenging economics. ‘We predict that solar, wind, and biomass to continue to gain market share from coal and nuclear into the future,’ the Citi analysts write.” Indeed, Citigroup says that the “levelized cost of energy,” the key metric in analyzing costs of different energy sources, indicates that all forms of renewables except marine are already cheaper than nuclear power and that both coal and nuclear are pricing themselves out of the market.

Levelized costs of electricity resources, from ACEEE. Note: we have seen some projected nuclear prices at even higher levels than shown here.

Levelized costs of electricity resources, from ACEEE. Note: we have seen some projected nuclear costs at even higher levels than shown here.

There’s nothing new about this except the report released by American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), but it’s worth remembering anyway: energy efficiency remains the cheapest and fastest means of addressing climate and energy issues. Every dollar spent on efficiency brings back $1.24 to $4 in total benefits to consumers. And, at 2.8 cents/kWh, electricity efficiency programs are one-half to one-third the cost of even the cheapest generation technologies (and way cheaper than nuclear power).

The right wing loses again in its effort to block renewable energy. Although the Kansas Senate had voted to repeal the state’s Renewable Energy Standard–as pressed for by American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Koch Brothers groups, etc., it actually is very popular in the state. So the Kansas House rejected the Senate and voted 77-44 yesterday to keep the state’s RES. So far, this year is going like last year: the far-right has failed in its every effort to stymie renewable energy. Let’s hope (and work to make sure) that trend continues.

One of the targets of the far-right groups like ALEC is solar net metering programs. These enable people with rooftop solar installations to sell back excess power to utilities at a reasonable cost. But the far-right thinks they’re a burden on utilities and that homeowners should get far less money through these programs (actually, they think the programs shouldn’t even exist). But in Minnesota, the state has determined that their existing net metering programs are actually priced far too low for the social benefits solar power brings. So the state Public Utilities Commission is planning to increase the rates utilities must pay for rooftop solar generated power. The formula Minnesota used to make this determination is something that could and should be followed by other states.

Despite Russia’s armed takeover of Crimea, Ukraine is expected to continue to provide Crimean solar plants with feed-in tariff support–support that is among the most generous in the world. This will enable solar plants in Crimea to continue operating; that wouldn’t be clear if the plants had to rely on Russia. There are several large solar plants in Crimea, with the biggest able to produce 100 Megawatts of solar power.

Michael Mariotte

March 27, 2014

Permalink: https://safeenergy.org/2014/03/27/nuclear-newsreel-thursday-march-27-2014/

You can now support GreenWorld with your tax-deductible contribution on our new donation page here. We gratefully appreciate every donation of any size–your support is what makes our work possible.

Comments are welcome on all GreenWorld posts! Say your piece above. Start a discussion. Don’t be shy; this blog is for you.

If you like GreenWorld, you can help us reach more people. Just use the icons below to “like” our posts and to share them on the various social networking sites you use. And if you don’t like GreenWorld, please let us know that too. Send an e-mail with your comments/complaints/compliments to nirsnet@nirs.org. Thank you!

Note: If you’d like to receive GreenWorld via e-mail daily, send your name and e-mail address to nirsnet@nirs.org and we’ll send you an invitation. Note that the invitation will come from a GreenWorld@wordpress.com address and not a nirs.org address, so watch for it.

 

 

Nuclear Newsreel, Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Nuclear Power

*It’s probably a lost cause, and it’s certainly a dangerous, expensive and unnecessary program, but that isn’t stopping South Carolina from trying to keep those taxpayer pork dollars flowing to the Savannah River Site. Yesterday, the state filed suit against the Department of Energy for its recent announced plan–which it appears to be implementing–to put the MOX plutonium fuel factory under construction into a “cold standby” status in preparation for ending the project entirely. Though the factory is said to be 60% complete, the estimated cost of finishing and operating the plant is $25 Billion, which DOE and the Obama Administration don’t want to spend. With few, if any, real customers wanting to use plutonium fuel because it’s too expensive (and a lot of reactors can’t use it without expensive modification), the Administration has decided the project is just a boondoggle. South Carolina doesn’t really care–we’re not sure state officials even know–what the plant does and its economic realities. They just want your and my tax money heading to South Carolina whether MOX fuel makes any sense or not.

*The Department of Energy (DOE) isn’t doing itself any favors, nor adding to its credibility, with its handling of the February 2014 radiation leak at the WIPP transuranic radioactive site in New Mexico. Now the DOE belatedly reports there was another radiation release from WIPP on March 11 (ironically on the third anniversary of the beginning of the Fukushima disaster. DOE says the leak was small and probably caused by residual radioactive particles that were trapped in the ventilation system from the initial radiation leak.

*Electricite de France’s (EDF) quietly closed one of its two reactors at its Dungeness site in the UK for five full months last year to build a new flood wall as a result of the Fukushima disaster. But EDF initially played down the shutdown, telling the local media, “Unit 22 at Dungeness station was taken offline on 20 May for maintenance work which includes completing improvements to flood defenses for extreme events.” Then there was silence until last October when EDF announced that the reactor was being put back into service. Said Stephen Thomas, professor of energy policy at the University of Greenwich: “EDF should have made more of an announcement. If a plant closes for five months it is not just fiddling about, it is something serious and EDF can’t pretend it’s not.”

*New testing by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicates that World War II-era radioactive waste is migrating from the West Lake landfill near the St. Louis airport to the adjacent Bridgeton landfill, where an underground fire has been raging for years. The West Lake landfill is a Superfund site being overseen by the EPA. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster said that if the radioactive migration is confirmed and has reached the Bridgeton landfill, the EPA must take over that landfill as well. The waste there is left over from the World War II effort to build an atomic bomb, and the site is the nation’s oldest radioactive waste dump, although it was never designed to store radioactive waste. 70 years later, and there is still no safe home for the first radioactive waste ever generated–nor for any of the waste generated since.

The Czech Republic's Temelin nuclear site from a cemetery across the street. Photo by Michael Mariotte.

The Czech Republic’s Temelin nuclear site from a cemetery across the street. Photo by Michael Mariotte.

*The prospect of construction of two new reactors at the Temelin site in the Czech Republic is a poster child for the poor economics of new nuclear power, writes Michael Kanellos for Forbes. New reactors are just too expensive for companies to build without government support, and in the Czech Republic that support doesn’t seem to be forthcoming. The utility, CEZ, is straightforward about its need for tax dollars: We won’t build without state guarantees,” Pavel Cyrani, chief of strategy at CEZ told Bloomberg in an interview. “It’s simply impossible.”

The article asks, “How high would those guarantees have to be? A pair of studies from Candole Partners predicts that the price would have to be 115 Euros a megawatt hour, or $157 per megawatt hour, in 2013 dollars for the full lifetime operation of the Temelin reactors for it to break even.”

The article goes on: “The subsidies required to make power from the plant competitive with today’s prices would cost taxpayers around a billion Euros a year, wrote Georgi Vukov at Candole.” Unlike the UK, where the government wants to subsidize construction of new Areva reactors at a cost twice that of current wholesale electricity prices, the Czech government doesn’t appear inclined to spend that kind of money.

*Chernobyl 28 years later: workers are still limited to 15 minute/day shifts inside the reactor A photoessay from deep inside Chernobyl and the nearby area from Slate. Worth a look.

Clean Energy

Last year, the extreme-right ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) failed in every one of its efforts in state legislatures to roll back renewable energy standards. And while ALEC is changing its strategy this year to attack net metering laws that encourage solar power development, it doesn’t look too promising for them again. Two articles on ALEC’s (and by extension the nuclear and fossil fuel industries) failure so far this year in Washington and Utah, with some other states close behind.

*People living near wind farms, worry no more. You have a better chance of being hit by a meteor than being hurt by a wind turbine accident. Some anti-wind power groups–and there are more of them than you might think–like to spread spurious claims that wind power is somehow harmful to people and that turbines must be set up far away from any households. This article should set the record straight.

Inside Washington

NRC Commissioner William Magwood

NRC Commissioner William Magwood

Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner William Magwood has announced that he will be leaving the NRC a year or so early to become head of the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency. He is expected to move on by September although his NRC term lasts until June 2015. To all or our European friends, what can we say but: we’re sorry! But we can’t say we’ll miss him. This will likely leave two vacancies, both democratic seats, for President Obama to fill this year. NRC Commissioner George Apostolakis’ term expires this June, and it is believed he will not seek re-appointment.

Michael Mariotte

March 19, 2014

Permalink: https://safeenergy.org/2014/03/19/nuclear-newsreel-wednesday-march-19-2014/

You can now support GreenWorld with your tax-deductible contribution on our new donation page here. We gratefully appreciate every donation of any size–your support is what makes our work possible.

Comments are welcome on all GreenWorld posts! Say your piece above. Start a discussion. Don’t be shy; this blog is for you.

If you like GreenWorld, you can help us reach more people. Just use the icons below to “like” our posts and to share them on the various social networking sites you use. And if you don’t like GreenWorld, please let us know that too. Send an e-mail with your comments/complaints/compliments to nirsnet@nirs.org. Thank you!

Note: If you’d like to receive GreenWorld via e-mail daily, send your name and e-mail address to nirsnet@nirs.org and we’ll send you an invitation. Note that the invitation will come from a GreenWorld@wordpress.com address and not a nirs.org address, so watch for it.

Nuclear Newsreel, Thursday, March 13, 2014

The MOX plutonium fuel factory under construction at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, 2013.  Photo from Friends of the Earth.

The MOX plutonium fuel factory under construction at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, 2013. Photo from Friends of the Earth.

Nuclear Power

Is this one reason the UK has seemingly been among the more reluctant European nations to support imposing sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine? The Guardian reported Wednesday that Britain is talking with Russia and its Rosatom atomic industry about building a new VVER reactor in the UK. A Memorandum of Understanding, signed in September 2013 but apparently not publicly revealed then, was “designed to be the most effective means of enabling Rosatom to prepare for entry into the United Kingdom civil nuclear market.”

Today in the Guardian, a follow-up article seems to ask the same question, as well as wonders about the long-term implications of relying on Russia as a major energy supplier: “Clearly there is something jarring about the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) boasting about its positive negotiations with the Russians over building a nuclear power station in Britain just as a summit is due to begin in London about what sanctions can be taken against Moscow over its involvement in the Crimea.

“If Vladimir Putin is threatening to once again use energy as a political weapon in the Ukraine by cutting off the country’s gas exports, then this is a bad moment to talk about state-owned Rosatom taking a critical stake in UK power infrastructure through the construction of an atomic plant.”

The Grand Gulf reactor in Port Gibson, Mississippi. Photo from NRC.

The Grand Gulf reactor in Port Gibson, Mississippi. Photo from NRC.

Not what a utility already facing pressure across the country to close unsafe aging reactors wants revealed: the shoes of two employees at Entergy’s Grand Gulf reactor in Mississippi set off radiation monitors at the plant. Investigation found a radioactive puddle, about two feet in diameter and 2 inches deep, inside the protected area of the plant. No word yet on how a radioactive puddle formed there.

And another utility facing pressure to close dangerous and expensive older reactors runs into a different kind of embarrassing situation: more than 70 reactor operators at Exelon nuclear sites filed a class action suit charging that the company has been shorting them on their pay. Seems Exelon hasn’t been paying its operators for the time they spend both before and after their shifts filling out documentation that is required for nuclear safety. Maybe that’s because Exelon isn’t particularly concerned about nuclear safety in the first place? The suit could eventually cover 600 reactor operators and could end up costing the company several million dollars.

Clean Energy

North Carolina seems to be accelerating its efforts to turn back the clock towards the stone age–at least in North Carolina. Since former Duke Energy executive Governor Pat McCrory took office, the state has been moving consistently away from some moderately progressive energy and environmental policies towards some that can most charitably be described as “pro-Duke”–the recent controversy over beneficial settlements toward Duke by the state’s environmental agencies only the most recent. But now the state has taken that giant step backwards: the state’s Department of Environment and Natural Resources has removed basic climate change information from its website. WRAL-TV reports that besides removing links to information from the front page of the site, “Two major reports on climate change are also missing from the site: a 100-page report on the possible economic impacts of greenhouse gas mitigation and the state’s 118-page Climate Action Plan, a multi-year project involving dozens of experts and policymakers. Both were commissioned by the state legislature, then controlled by Democrats, and completed in 2008.”

If you ever wondered when solar power would go mainstream, wonder no longer. Solar City has begun putting employees in about 50 Best Buy stores in Arizona, California, Oregon, New York and Hawaii to talk about its solar power systems and the advantages of the company’s leasing models.  Will CVS be next?

Cincinnati, Ohio is the largest city in the U.S. to buy 100% renewable energy, a practice it began in 2012. The city briefly considered moving back to more conventional power, but decided this week to continue its 100% renewable policy–a decision made easier by that fact that not only is its power cleaner, it is also considerably cheaper than the fossil fuel/nuclear power option offered by Duke Energy.

rooftopsolarThere is a reason why those, like the right-wing group ALEC, who attack rooftop solar power and the net metering policies that promote it are losing. The public really, really likes rooftop solar and net metering. A new poll taken in Florida, for example, found that 77% of voters there support net metering; only 13% oppose the policy. 71% oppose adding any new fees on net metered solar customers, an approach that ALEC and some utilities are espousing to slow down the growth of solar power in favor of fossil fuels and nuclear power. Let’s face it ALEC: your day has passed.

The rapid transformation of the electricity sector in Australia is continuing to confound the energy “experts.” No matter what they predict, actual energy demand continues to fall below their estimates. The reason isn’t that people are turning off their lights and refrigerators to save money, it’s because of the rapid growth of rooftop solar power (which reduces electric demand from utility power plants) and effectiveness of energy efficiency programs. While the penetration of rooftop solar is certainly higher in Australia than the U.S., particularly among low and moderate income households, the trends are the same in the U.S. and over the next few years will become just as noticeable.

Inside Washington

The South Carolina congressional delegation is apparently afraid they’re on the losing side of the battle over the future of the Department of Energy’s risky and expensive MOX plutonium fuel program. The Obama Administration has been trying for two years to end the program, and this year’s budget calls for the project to be put on cold standby until it is fully ended. The only reason it’s lasted this long has been the power of the delegation and its willingness to do thing like put holds on presidential nominations to extort continued federal pork dollars for the well-over-budget project. But fearful that this time they may lose, U.S. Sens. Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott and U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson recently sent a letter urging South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley to file a lawsuit–in their words, to “explore any legal avenues”–to keep the project going. Perhaps this year, this program finally will meet its well-deserved end.

Michael Mariotte

March 13, 2014

Permalink: https://safeenergy.org/2014/03/13/nuclear-newsreel-thursday-march-13-2014/

Comments are welcome! Say your piece above. Start a discussion. Don’t be shy; this blog is for you.

If you like GreenWorld, you can help us reach more people. Just use the icons below to “like” our posts and to share them on the various social networking sites you use. And if you don’t like GreenWorld, please let us know that too. Send an e-mail with your comments/complaints/compliments to nirsnet@nirs.org. Thank you!

Note: If you’d like to receive GreenWorld via e-mail daily, send your name and e-mail address to nirsnet@nirs.org and we’ll send you an invitation. Note that the invitation will come from a GreenWorld@wordpress.com address and not a nirs.org address, so watch for it.

Nuclear Newsreel, Monday, March 10, 2014

Nuclear Power

The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) has filed a legal challenge at NRC over Florida Power and Light’s (FPL) St. Lucie reactors’ steam generators. As reported two weeks ago (Nuclear Newsreel, February 24 and 25), an unusual amount of wear has been experienced at the relatively-recently replaced generators, leading to concern that the reactors could be headed to a situation similar to that of San Onofre, where a radiation-releasing steam generator tube rupture eventually led to the permanent shutdown of both reactors. The NRC and FPL insist that there are no safety issues posed by the thinning of the tubes, but that story has been heard before. And even if true, the economic ramifications may be a different story if conditions are such that new generators are already needed. SACE’s challenge calls for, at the very minimum, a public hearing on the issue.

A world awash in a nuclear explosives: Japan’s plutonium production plans pose a global threat. The Center for Public Integrity has produced an important and damning expose of Japan’s current plans–despite Fukushima–to open its Rokkasho Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Facility. At full capacity, the plant could produce 96 tons of plutonium over the next 12 years, “an amount greater than all the stocks that remain in the United States as a legacy of the Cold War’s nuclear arms race.” 6.6 pounds of plutonium is sufficient make a nuclear weapon with an explosive power of 1 kiloton, or 1,000 tons, of TNT. The plutonium would be intended for use in Japanese reactors capable of using plutonium-based (MOX) fuel. One problem: Japan has no such reactors right now. Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3 did use some MOX fuel, and that may be one reason the reactor suffered so much more damage than the other reactors at the site (although in that case, “so much more” is a relative concept). While the government of Japanese Prime Minister Abe remains intent on restarting some of the country’s reactors, using plutonium fuel in them would elevate their risk potential considerably. This lengthy article goes into considerable more detail about the proliferation risks of Japan’s plans. An excellent piece.

The UK’s Rob Edwards, who writes frequently on nuclear issues, today discusses a 2012 incident at a Scottish naval reactor, where officials at first denied there had been an accident but later admitted that radioactivity had been leaking into the reactor’s cooling water. In Vulcangate: the web of deceit, Edwards writes “We now also know that even when [Defense Secretary Philip] Hammond did disclose what had happened, he was misleading. He insisted that there had been ‘no measurable change in the radiation discharge’ from the site despite official figures showing a tenfold rise in emissions due to the incident.”

Clean Energy

The far-right wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) trains its sights on city and local government to attack renewable energy. Having failed at overturning any state renewable energy laws last year (although ALEC is trying again this year), ALEC is turning some attention now to working at the city and municipal level. That’s one reason NIRS now has the capability to help you reach these same officials–and we will help you use it.

A new public opinion poll commissioned by CleanEdge and Solar City finds that yes, American support renewable energy (88%); and yes, Americans are interested in installing solar power on their homes (62%). 73 percent of homeowners also said they would welcome clean energy provided by an entity other than their utility. Somewhat surprisingly though, fewer than half of all homeowners understand that solar power is more affordable today than it was three years ago. You can download a report on the poll here.

The spread of 100% renewable towns in Illinois 2011-2013.

The spread of 100% renewable towns in Illinois 2011-2013.

A new report from several environmental groups shows that 91 Illinois communities, with a total of 1.7 million residents, are already receiving 100% of their power from renewable energy. Who would have thought a frosty rustbelt state  would be leading the nation in renewable power? While some of the 100% renewable comes from renewable energy credits rather than direct renewable energy power, it is certainly a step forward, one that is replicable in other states, and is certain to be only the beginning.

Another article on the revolution in batteries and electricity storage, this one from the Guardian, which calls the prospect of cheap electricity storage a “convulsion of change about to hit the global economy.” That about says it all.

One way of financing clean energy projects is through the establishment of goverment-backed “green banks.” This concept may have some appeal given that federal support for clean energy has dropped from $44 billion in FY 2009 to a projected $11 billion in 2014. Efforts to set up such a bank at the federal level so far have failed–although at the federal level every proposal so far has included nuclear power as a technology that could be funded by a “green bank”–hardly what most people consider as “green.” That has led to opposition to the banks by environmental groups that normally might support such a project. Now, some states are considering establishing such banks; Connecticut already has done so.

Michael Mariotte

Permalink: https://safeenergy.org/2014/03/10/nuclear-newsreel-monday-march-10-2014/

Note: GreenWorld will not publish tomorrow, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. Join the Fukushima anniversary-related action nearest you! We’ll be back on Wednesday.

Comments are welcome! Say your piece above. Start a discussion. Don’t be shy; this blog is for you.

If you like GreenWorld, you can help us reach more people. Just use the icons below to “like” our posts and to share them on the various social networking sites you use. And if you don’t like GreenWorld, please let us know that too. Send an e-mail with your comments/complaints/compliments to nirsnet@nirs.org. Thank you!

Note: If you’d like to receive GreenWorld via e-mail daily, send your name and e-mail address to nirsnet@nirs.org and we’ll send you an invitation. Note that the invitation will come from a GreenWorld@wordpress.com address and not a nirs.org address, so watch for it.