Jump to content

Anti-nuclear movement in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.150.198.66 (talk) at 17:23, 31 May 2011 (→Other people: Patrick does not support nuclear power). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

File:Nuclear power is not healthy poster.jpg
Anti-nuclear poster from the 1970s American movement

The anti-nuclear movement in the United States consists of more than 70 anti-nuclear groups which have acted to oppose nuclear power or nuclear weapons, or both, in the United States. These groups include the Abalone Alliance, Clamshell Alliance, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and Physicians for Social Responsibility. The anti-nuclear movement has delayed construction or halted commitments to build some new nuclear plants,[1] and has pressured the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to enforce and strengthen the safety regulations for nuclear power plants.[2]

Anti-nuclear protests reached a peak in the 1970s and 1980s and grew out of the environmental movement.[3] Campaigns which captured national public attention involved the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Seabrook Station Nuclear Power Plant, Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant, and Three Mile Island.[1] On June 12, 1982, one million people demonstrated in New York City's Central Park against nuclear weapons and for an end to the cold war arms race. It was the largest anti-nuclear protest and the largest political demonstration in American history.[4][5] International Day of Nuclear Disarmament protests were held on June 20, 1983 at 50 sites across the United States.[6][7] There were many Nevada Desert Experience protests and peace camps at the Nevada Test Site during the 1980s and 1990s.[8][9]

More recent campaigning by anti-nuclear groups has related to several nuclear power plants including the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Plant,[10][11] Indian Point Energy Center,[12] Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,[13] Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station,[14] Salem Nuclear Power Plant,[15] and Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant.[16] There have also been campaigns relating to the Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Plant,[17] the Idaho National Laboratory,[18] proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository,[19] the Hanford Site, the Nevada Test Site,[20] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,[21] and transportation of nuclear waste from the Los Alamos National Laboratory.[22]

Some scientists and engineers have expressed reservations about nuclear power, including: Barry Commoner, S. David Freeman, John Gofman, Arnold Gundersen, Mark Z. Jacobson, Amory Lovins, Arjun Makhijani, Gregory Minor, and Joseph Romm. Scientists who have opposed nuclear weapons include Linus Pauling and Eugene Rabinowitch.

Emergence of the movement

See also: Nuclear weapons and the United States and Nuclear debate

Emergence of the anti-nuclear weapons movement

A nuclear fireball lights up the night in the United States nuclear test Upshot-Knothole Badger on April 18, 1953
Map of major U.S. nuclear weapons infrastructure sites during the Cold War and into the present. Places with grayed-out names are no longer functioning and are in various stages of environmental remediation.

The nuclear debate initially was about nuclear weapons policy, and began within the scientific community. Scientific concern about the adverse health effects arising from atmospheric nuclear weapons testing first emerged in 1954.[23] Professional associations such as the Federation of Atomic Scientists and the Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs were involved.[24] The National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy was formed in November 1957, and surveys showed rising public uneasiness about the nuclear arms race -- especially atmospheric nuclear weapons tests that sent radioactive fallout around the globe.[25] In 1962, Linus Pauling won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work to stop the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons, and the "Ban the Bomb" movement spread throughout the United States.[24]

Between 1945 and 1992, the United States maintained a program of vigorous nuclear weapons testing. A total of 1,054 nuclear tests and two nuclear attacks were conducted, with over 900 of them at the Nevada Test Site, and ten on miscellaneous sites in the United States (Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, and New Mexico).[26] Until November 1962, the vast majority of the U.S. tests were above-ground; after the acceptance of the Partial Test Ban Treaty all testing was relegated underground, in order to prevent the dispersion of nuclear fallout.

The U.S. program of atmospheric nuclear testing exposed some people to the hazards of fallout. Since the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990, more than $1.38 billion in compensation has been approved. The money is going to people who took part in the tests, notably at the Nevada Test Site, and to others exposed to the radiation.[27][28]

Emergence of the anti-nuclear power movement

The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 encouraged private corporations to build nuclear reactors and a significant learning phase followed with many early partial core meltdowns and accidents at experimental reactors and research facilities.[29] This led to the introduction of the Price-Anderson Act in 1957, which was "an implicit admission that nuclear power provided risks that producers were unwilling to assume without federal backing".[29]

The first U.S. reactor to face public opposition was Fermi 1 in 1957. It was built approximately 30 miles from Detroit and there was opposition from the United Auto Workers Union.[30]

Pacific Gas & Electric planned to build the first commercially viable nuclear power plant in the USA at Bodega Bay, north of San Francisco. The proposal was controversial and conflict with local citizens began in 1958.[31] The proposed plant site was close to the San Andreas fault and close to the region's environmentally sensitive fishing and dairy industries. The Sierra Club became actively involved.[32] The conflict ended in 1964, with the forced abandonment of plans for the power plant. Historian Thomas Wellock traces the birth of the anti-nuclear movement to the controversy over Bodega Bay.[31] Attempts to build a nuclear power plant in Malibu were similar to those at Bodega Bay and were also abandoned.[31]

Nuclear accidents continued into the 1960s with a small test reactor exploding at the Stationary Low-Power Reactor Number One in Idaho Falls in January 1961 and a partial meltdown at the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station in Michigan in 1966.[29]

In his 1963 book Change, Hope and the Bomb, David Lilienthal criticized nuclear developments, particularly the nuclear industry's failure to address the nuclear waste question. He argued that it would be "particularly irresponsible to go ahead with the construction of full scale nuclear power plants without a safe method of nuclear waste disposal having been demonstrated". However, Lilienthal stopped short of a blanket rejection of nuclear power. His view was that a more cautious approach was necessary.[33]

Samuel Walker, in his book Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective, explains that the growth of the nuclear industry in the U.S. occurred as the environmental movement was being formed. Environmentalists saw the advantages of nuclear power in reducing air pollution, but became critical of nuclear technology on other grounds.[34] The view that nuclear power was better for the environment than conventional fuels was partially undermined in the late 1960s when major controversy erupted over the effects of waste heat from nuclear plants on water quality. The nuclear industry "gradually and reluctantly took action to reduce thermal pollution by building cooling towers or ponds for plants on inland waterways".[34]

Another concern was the effect of radiation emissions from nuclear plants. Several scientists, including John Gofman and Arthur Tamplin, challenged the prevailing view that the small amounts of radiation released by nuclear power plants during normal operation were not a problem. They argued "that the routine releases were a severe threat to public health and could cause tens of thousands of deaths from cancer each year".[34] Exchange of views about radiation risks caused uneasiness about nuclear power, especially among those unable to evaluate the conflicting claims.[34]

Another issue was reactor safety. The large size of nuclear plants ordered during the late 1960s raised new safety questions and created fears of a severe reactor accident that would send large quantities of radiation into the environment. In the early 1970s, a highly contentious debate over the performance of emergency core cooling systems in nuclear plants, designed to prevent a core meltdown that could lead to the "China syndrome", received coverage in the popular media and technical journals.[16][35]

Many technologies and materials associated with the creation of a nuclear power program have a dual-use capability, in that they can be used to make nuclear weapons if a country chooses to do so. In 1975 over 2,000 prominent scientists signed a Declaration on Nuclear Power, prepared by the Union of Concerned Scientists, warning of the dangers of nuclear proliferation and urging the President and Congress to suspend the exportation of nuclear power to other countries, and reduce domestic construction until major problems were resolved.[36]

In 1976, four nuclear engineers -- three from GE and one from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—resigned, stating that nuclear power was not as safe as their superiors were claiming.[37][38] These men were engineers who had spent most of their working life building reactors, and their defection galvanized anti-nuclear groups across the country.[39][40] They testified to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy that:

"the cumulative effect of all design defects and deficiencies in the design, construction and operations of nuclear power plants makes a nuclear power plant accident, in our opinion, a certain event. The only question is when, and where.[37]

There was also the issue of nuclear weapons proliferation. Theodore Taylor, a former nuclear weapons designer, had explained "the ease with which nuclear bombs could be manufactured if fissionable material was available".[35]

These issues, together with a series of other environmental, technical, and public health questions, made nuclear power the source of acute controversy. Public support, which was strong in the early 1960s, had been shaken. Forbes, in the September 1975 issue, reported that "the anti-nuclear coalition has been remarkably successful ... [and] has certainly slowed the expansion of nuclear power."[16] By the mid-1970s anti-nuclear activism, fueled by dissenting experts, had moved beyond local protests and politics to gain a wider appeal and influence. Although it lacked a single co-ordinating organization, and did not have uniform goals, it emerged as a movement sharply focused on opposing nuclear power, and the movement's efforts gained a great deal of national attention.[16]

On March 28, 1979, equipment failures and operator error contributed to loss of coolant and a partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant in Pennsylvania. The World Nuclear Association has stated that cleanup of the damaged nuclear reactor system at TMI-2 took nearly 12 years and cost approximately US $973 million.[41] Benjamin K. Sovacool, in his 2007 preliminary assessment of major energy accidents, estimated that the TMI accident caused a total of $2.4 billion in property damages.[42] The health effects of the Three Mile Island accident are widely, but not universally, agreed to be very low level.[41][43] The accident triggered protests around the world.[44]

Complexity of nuclear power

See also: nuclear power debate

Nuclear power plants are a complex energy system.[45][46] and opponents of nuclear power have criticized the sophistication and complexity of the technology. Helen Caldicott has said: "... in essence, a nuclear reactor is just a very sophisticated and dangerous way to boil water -- analogous to cutting a pound of butter with a chain saw."[47] These critics of nuclear power advocate the use of energy conservation, efficient energy use, and appropriate renewable energy technologies to create our energy future.[48]

Amory Lovins, from the Rocky Mountain Institute, has argued that centralized electricity systems with giant power plants are becoming obsolete. In their place are emerging "distributed resources"—smaller, decentralized electricity supply sources (including efficiency) that are cheaper, cleaner, less risky, more flexible, and quicker to deploy. Such technologies are often called "soft energy technologies" and Lovins viewed their impacts as more gentle, pleasant, and manageable than hard energy technologies such as nuclear power.[49]

Nuclear energy systems have a long stay time. The completion of the sequence of activities related to one commercial nuclear power station, from the start of construction through the safe disposal of its last radioactive waste, may take 100–150 years.[45]

Anti-nuclear protests

Main article: Anti-nuclear protests in the United States
Anti-nuclear protest at Harrisburg in 1979, following the Three Mile Island accident
President Jimmy Carter leaving Three Mile Island for Middletown, Pennsylvania, April 1, 1979

On November 1, 1961, at the height of the Cold War, about 50,000 women brought together by Women Strike for Peace marched in 60 cities in the United States to demonstrate against nuclear weapons. It was the largest national women's peace protest of the 20th century.[50][51]

On June 12, 1982, one million people demonstrated in New York City's Central Park against nuclear weapons and for an end to the cold war arms race. It was the largest anti-nuclear protest and the largest political demonstration in American history.[4][5]

Marco Giugni, in his book Social Protest and Policy Change, explains that several anti-nuclear power campaigns captured national public attention in the 1970s and 1980s. These involved the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Seabrook Station Nuclear Power Plant, Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant, and Three Mile Island.[1] Specific protests have included:[52][53]

  • May 2, 1977: 1,414 protesters were arrested at the Seabrook nuclear power plant in New Hampshire.[52][54]
  • June 1978: some 12,000 people attended a protest at Seabrook.[52]
  • August 1978: almost 500 people were arrested for protesting at the Diablo Canyon Power Plant in California.[55]
  • March 28, 1979: The Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, began undergoing what would become the most famous nuclear accident in U.S. history. The accident triggered protests around the world[44] and enhanced the credibility of anti-nuclear groups, who predicted an accident.[56]
  • April 8, 1979: 30,000 people marched in San Francisco to support shutting down the Diablo Canyon Power Plant.[57]
  • May 6, 1979: an estimated 70,000 people, including the governor of California, attended a march and rally against nuclear power in Washington, D.C.[57][58]
  • June 2, 1979: about 500 people were arrested for protesting construction of the Black Fox Nuclear Power Plant in Oklahoma.[52][59]
  • June 3, 1979: some 15,000 people attended a rally at the Shoreham nuclear power plant on Long Island, New York, and about 600 were arrested.[60]
  • June 30, 1979: about 38,000 people attended a protest rally at Diablo Canyon.[61]
  • 1979: Abalone Alliance members held a 38-day sit-in at Californian Governor Jerry Brown's office to protest continued operation of Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station, which was a duplicate of the Three Mile Island facility.[62] In 1989, Sacramento voters voted to shut down the Rancho Seco power plant.[63]
  • September 23, 1979: Almost 200,000 people attended the nation's largest antinuclear rally to date, staged on the then-empty north end of the Battery Park City landfill in New York City.[64] The New York rally was held in conjunction with a series of nightly “No Nukes” concerts given at Madison Square Garden from September 19 through 23 by Musicians United for Safe Energy.
  • June 22, 1980: about 15,000 people attended a protest near the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in California.[52]
  • September 1981: more than 900 protesters were arrested at Diablo Canyon.[65]
  • May 1984: about 130 demonstrators showed up for start-up day at Diablo Canyon, and five were arrested.[66]
  • 1986: Hundreds of people walked from Los Angeles to Washington DC in what is referred to as the Great Peace March for Global Nuclear Disarmament; the march took nine months.[67]
  • February 6, 1987: More than 400 people were arrested at the Nevada Test Site, when nearly 2,000 demonstrators, including six members of Congress, held a rally to protest nuclear weapons testing.[68]
  • June 5, 1989: hundreds of demonstrators at Seabrook Station nuclear power plant protested against the plant's first low-power testing, and the police arrested 627 people for trespassing.[69]
  • April 20, 1992: 493 anti-nuclear protesters were arrested on misdemeanor charges, as demonstrators clashed with guards at an annual Easter demonstration against weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site.[70]
  • May 1, 2005: Anti-nuclear/anti-war march past the UN in New York, 60 years after the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[71][72]
  • October 16, 2006: 26 people were arrested outside the Brattleboro offices of Vermont Yankee owner Entergy Nuclear; the demonstration drew about 200 people.[73]
  • April 2009: About 150 activists marched against the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant and to urge lawmakers to back development of clean energy sources such as wind power and solar power; the marchers had gathered 12,000 signatures in support of closing Vermont Yankee.[74][75]
  • November 2, 2009: Five protesters, including Jesuit Priest William J. Bichsel, S.J. were arrested for breaking through two levels of security to protest the nuclear weapons stored at the base. The protesters walked to a bunker where the weapons were stored and spilled blood, hung posters and prayed.[76]

There is an annual protest against U.S. nuclear weapons research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and in the 2007 protest, 64 people were arrested.[77] There have been a series of protests at the Nevada Test Site and in the April 2007 Nevada Desert Experience protest, 39 people were cited by police.[78] There have been anti-nuclear protests at Naval Base Kitsap for many years, and several in 2008.[79][80][81] Also in 2008 and 2009, there have been protests about several proposed nuclear reactors.[82][83]

Some analysts interpret the decline of public protest against nuclear power over the years as "evidence of the decline of the anti-nuclear movement". Others suggest that "what has occurred instead is the institutionalization of the anti-nuclear movement".[84] Since 1980, the anti-nuclear movement has carried its contests into less visible, and more specialized institutional areas, such as regulatory and licensing hearings, and legal challenges.[84] At the state level, anti-nuclear groups were also successful in placing several anti-nuclear referendums on the ballot.[85]

Specific groups

Main article: List of anti-nuclear groups in the United States
See also: List of nuclear power groups

Anti-nuclear organizations are those which oppose nuclear power or nuclear weapons, or both. More than eighty anti-nuclear groups are operating, or have operated, in the United States. These include:

Many religious groups in America have a strong record of opposing nuclear weapons. Rejecting the development, deployment and use of nuclear weapons is "one of the most widely shared convictions across faith traditions".[86] In the 1980s religious groups organized anti-nuclear marches involving hundreds of thousands of people, and the Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish communities published explicitly anti-nuclear statements. Specific groups involved included the American Catholic Bishops, the Southern Baptist Convention and the Episcopal Church. Muslims also began to speak out against nuclear weapons in 2000.[86]

The platform adopted by the delegates of the Green Party (United States) at their annual Green Congress May 26–28, 2000, reflecting the majority views of the membership, included the creation of self-reproducing, renewable energy systems and use of federal investments, purchasing, mandates, and incentives to shut down nuclear power plants and phase out fossil fuels.[87]

Recent campaigning by anti-nuclear groups has related to several nuclear power plants including the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Plant,[10][11] Indian Point Energy Center,[12] Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,[13] Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station,[14] Salem Nuclear Power Plant,[15] and Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant.[16] There have also been campaigns relating to the Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Plant,[17] the Idaho National Laboratory,[18] proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository,[19] the Hanford Site, the Nevada Test Site,[20] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,[21] and transportation of nuclear waste from the Los Alamos National Laboratory.[22]

People with anti-nuclear views

Al Gore

Former vice president Al Gore says he is not anti-nuclear, but has stated that the "cost of the present generation of reactors is nearly prohibitive".[88] In his 2009 book, Our Choice, Gore argues that nuclear power was once "expected to provide virtually unlimited supplies of low-cost electricity", but the reality is that it has been "an energy source in crisis for the last 30 years".[89] Worldwide growth in nuclear power has slowed in recent years, with no new reactors and an "actual decline in global capacity and output in 2008". In the United States, "no nuclear power plants ordered after 1972 have been built to completion".[89]

Of the 253 nuclear power reactors originally ordered in the United States from 1953 to 2008, 48 percent were canceled, 11 percent were prematurely shut down, 14 percent experienced at least a one-year-or-more outage, and 27 percent are operating without having a year-plus outage. Thus, only about one fourth of those ordered, or about half of those completed, are still operating and have proved relatively reliable.[90]

Amory Lovins

In his 2005 book Winning the Oil Endgame, Amory Lovins praises nuclear power engineers, but is critical of the nuclear industry:

No vendor has made money selling power reactors. This is the greatest failure of any enterprise in the industrial history of the world. We don’t mean that as a criticism of nuclear power’s practitioners, on whose skill and devotion we all continue to depend; the impressive operational improvements in U.S. power reactors in recent years deserve great credit. It is simply how technologies and markets evolved, despite the best intentions and immense effort. In nuclear power’s heydey, its proponents saw no competitors but central coal-fired power stations. Then, in quick succession, came end-use efficiency, combined-cycle plants, distributed generation (including versions that recovered valuable heat previously wasted), and competitive windpower. The range of competitors will only continue to expand more and their costs to fall faster than any nuclear technology can match.[91]

In 1988, Lovins argued that improving energy efficiency can simultaneously ameliorate greenhouse warming, reduce acid rain and air pollution, save money, and avoid the problems of nuclear power. Given the urgency of abating global warming, Lovins stated that we cannot afford to invest in nuclear power when those same dollars put into efficiency would displace far more carbon dioxide.[92]

In “Nuclear Power: Climate Fix or Folly,” published in 2010, Lovins argued that expanded nuclear power "does not represent a cost-effective solution to global warming and that investors would shun it were it not for generous government subsidies lubricated by intensive lobbying efforts".[93]

Joseph Romm

Joseph Romm contends that nuclear power generates about 20 percent of all U.S. electricity, and because it is a low-carbon source of around-the-clock power, it has received renewed interest in recent years.[94] Yet, Romm argues, nuclear power’s "own myriad limitations will constrain its growth, especially in the near term", and the limitations include:[94]

  • Prohibitively high, and escalating, capital costs.
  • Production bottlenecks in key components needed to build plants.
  • Very long construction times.
  • Concerns about uranium supplies and importation issues.
  • Unresolved problems with the availability and security of radioactive waste storage which has a 100,000 year shelf life.
  • Large-scale water use and contamination amid shortages.
  • High electricity prices from new plants.[94]

Lester Brown

Lester Brown argues that nuclear power is simply not economical,[95] and that installed nuclear capacity will probably remain much the same for the foreseeable future:

Our assumption is that new openings of nuclear power plants worldwide will simply offset the closing of aging plants, with no overall growth in capacity. If we use full-cost pricing—requiring utilities to absorb the costs of disposing of nuclear waste, of decommissioning the plant when it is worn out, and of insuring the reactors against possible accidents and terrorist attacks—building nuclear plants in a competitive electricity market is simply not economical.[96]

Brown states that simple measures, such as changing to more efficient lighting, can lead to significant reductions in energy consumption.[97]

Christopher Flavin

Many advocates of nuclear power argue that, given the urgency of doing something about climate change quickly, it must be pursued. Christopher Flavin, however, contends that speedy implementation is not one of nuclear power’s strong points:[98]

Planning, licensing, and constructing even a single nuclear plant typically takes a decade or more, and plants frequently fail to meet completion deadlines. Due to the dearth of orders in recent decades, the world currently has very limited capacity to manufacture many of the critical components of nuclear plants. Rebuilding that capacity will take a decade or more.[98]

Given the urgency of the climate problem, Flavin emphasizes the rapid commercialization of renewable energy and efficient energy use:

Improved energy productivity and renewable energy are both available in abundance—and new policies and technologies are rapidly making them more economically competitive with fossil fuels. In combination, these energy options represent the most robust alternative to the current energy system, capable of providing the diverse array of energy services that a modern economy requires. Given the urgency of the climate problem, that is indeed convenient.[99]

Other people

Other notable individuals who have expressed reservations about nuclear power or nuclear weapons, or both, in the US include:[100][101][102]

Criticism

The movement has been criticized by some environmentalists and scientists for understating the environmental impact of fossil fuels and renewable resources, and overstating the dangers of nuclear power.[103] Bernard Cohen, Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Pittsburgh, calculates that nuclear power is many times safer than any other form of power generation.[104]

Patrick Moore, one of the initial founders of Greenpeace, said in a 2008 interview that, " "It wasn't until after I'd left Greenpeace and the climate change issue started coming to the forefront that I started rethinking energy policy in general and realised that I had been incorrect in my analysis of nuclear as being some kind of evil plot."[105]

Critics of the movement point to independent studies showing the capital costs of renewable energy sources are higher than those from nuclear power.[106] Critics argue that the amount of waste generated by nuclear power is very small, as all the high-level nuclear waste from 50+ years of operation of the world's nuclear reactors would fit into a single football field to the depth of five feet.[107] By contrast, coal plants create nearly a million tons of waste per day and release more total radioactivity than nuclear plants, due to the uranium and thorium found naturally within the coal. Nuclear proponents also point out that cost and waste figures are derived from nuclear reactors built using second generation designs, dating from the 1960s. Advanced reactor designs are estimated to be much cheaper to operate, and generate less than 1% the amount of waste of current designs.[108][109]

Recent developments

See also: List of prospective nuclear units in the United States

In November 2009, The Washington Post reported that nuclear power is emerging as "perhaps the world's most unlikely weapon against climate change, with the backing of even some green activists who once campaigned against it".[110] The report said that rather than deride the potential for nuclear power, some environmentalists are embracing it, and that presently there is only "muted opposition" -- nothing like the protests and plant invasions that helped define the anti-nuclear movement in the United States during the 1970s.[110]

As of early 2010, anti-nuclear groups such as Physicians for Social Responsibility, NukeFree.org, and NIRS were actively fighting federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plant construction. In February 2010, several groups coordinated a national call-in day to Congress to attempt to stop $54 billion in federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plants. However, the first such loan guarantee of $8.3 billion was offered to Southern Company that same month.[111]

In January 2010, about 175 anti-nuclear activists participated in a 126-mile walk in an effort to block the re-licensing of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant.[112] In February 2010, a large number of anti-nuclear activists and private citizens gathered in Montpelier to be at hand as the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 against the "Public Good" certificate needed for continued operation of Vermont Yankee past 2012.[113]

In April 2010 a dozen environmental groups (including Friends of the Earth, South Carolina's Sierra Club, Nuclear Watch South, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Georgia Women's Action for New Directions) stated that the proposed AP1000 reactor containment design is "inherently less safe than current reactors".[114] Arnold Gundersen, a nuclear scientist, authored a 32-page report arguing that the new AP1000 reactors will be vulnerable to leaks caused by corrosion holes. There are plans for the Westinghouse AP1000 reactors to be constructed at seven sites across the southeast, including Plant Vogtle in Burke County, Georgia.[114][115]

In October 2010, Michael Mariotte, executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service anti-nuclear group, predicted that the U.S. nuclear industry will not experience a nuclear renaissance, for the most simple of reasons: “nuclear reactors make no economic sense”. The economic slump has driven down electricity demand and the price of competing energy sources, and Congress has failed of to pass climate change legislation, making nuclear economics very difficult.[116]

Governor-elect Peter Shumlin is a prominent opponent of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant and two days after Shumlin was elected in November 2010, Entergy put the plant up for sale.[117]

Post-Fukushima

Following the 2011 Japanese nuclear accidents, activists who were involved in the movement’s emergence (such as Graham Nash and Paul Gunter), suggest that Japan’s nuclear crisis may rekindle an anti-nuclear protest movement in the United States. The aim, they say, is "not just to block the Obama administration’s push for new nuclear construction, but to convince Americans that existing plants pose dangers".[118]

In March 2011, 600 people gathered for a weekend protest outside the Vermont Yankee plant. The demonstration was held to show support for the thousands of Japanese people who are endangered by possible radiation from the Fukushima I nuclear accidents.[119]

The New England region has a long history of anti-nuclear activism and 75 people held a State House rally on April 6, 2011, to "protest the region’s aging nuclear plants and the increasing stockpile of radioactive spent fuel rods at them".[120] The protest was held shortly before a State House hearing where legislators were scheduled to hear representatives of the region’s three nuclear plants – Pilgrim in Plymouth, Vermont Yankee in Vernon, and Seabrook in New Hampshire -- talk about the safety of their reactors in the light of the Japanese nuclear crisis. Vermont Yankee and Pilgrim have designs similar to the crippled Japanese nuclear plant.[120]

As of April 2011, a total of 45 groups and individuals from across the nation are formally asking the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to immediately suspend all licensing and other activities at 21 proposed nuclear reactor projects in 15 states until the NRC completes a thorough post-Fukushima reactor crisis examination. The petitioners also are asking the NRC to supplement its own investigation by establishing an independent commission comparable to that set up in the wake of the serious, though less severe, 1979 Three Mile Island accident. The petitioners include Public Citizen, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, and San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace.[121][122][123]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c Giugni, Marco (2004). Social Protest and Policy Change: Ecology, Antinuclear, and Peace Movements p. 44.
  2. ^ Jerry Brown and Rinaldo Brutoco (1997). Profiles in Power: The Anti-nuclear movement and the Dawn of the Solar Age, p. 198.
  3. ^ Herbert P. Kitschelt. Political Opportunity and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1986, p. 62.
  4. ^ a b Jonathan Schell. The Spirit of June 12 The Nation, July 2, 2007.
  5. ^ a b 1982 - a million people march in New York City
  6. ^ Harvey Klehr. Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today Transaction Publishers, 1988, p. 150.
  7. ^ 1,400 Anti-nuclear protesters arrested Miami Herald, June 21, 1983.
  8. ^ Robert Lindsey. 438 Protesters are Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site New York Times, February 6, 1987.
  9. ^ 493 Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site New York Times, April 20, 1992.
  10. ^ a b Groups petition against new nuclear plant
  11. ^ a b Fermi 3 opposition takes legal action to block new nuclear reactor
  12. ^ a b Hudson River Lovers Fight to Shutter Aging Nuclear Power Plant
  13. ^ a b Oyster Creek's time is up, residents tell board Examiner, June 28, 2007.
  14. ^ a b Pilgrim Watch (undated). Pilgrim Watch
  15. ^ a b Unplugsalem.org (undated). UNPLUG Salem
  16. ^ a b c d e Walker, J. Samuel (2004). Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 10-11.
  17. ^ a b Stop the Bombs! April 2010 Action Event at Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Complex, Cite error: The named reference "y-12" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  18. ^ a b Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free (2003). Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free
  19. ^ a b Sierra Club. (undated). Deadly Nuclear Waste Transport
  20. ^ a b 22 Arrested in Nuclear Protest New York Times, August 10, 1989.
  21. ^ a b Hundreds Protest at Livermore Lab The TriValley Herald, August 11, 2003.
  22. ^ a b Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (undated). About CCNS
  23. ^ Wolfgang Rudig (1990). Anti-nuclear Movements: A World Survey of Opposition to Nuclear Energy, Longman, p. 55.
  24. ^ a b Jerry Brown and Rinaldo Brutoco (1997). Profiles in Power: The Anti-nuclear Movement and the Dawn of the Solar Age, Twayne Publishers, pp. 191-192.
  25. ^ Lawrence S. Wittner. Preserving the Golden Rule as a Piece of Anti-Nuclear History History News Network, 8 February 2010.
  26. ^ Carey Sublette, Gallery of U.S. Nuclear Tests
  27. ^ What governments offer to victims of nuclear tests The Associated Press, March 24, 2009.
  28. ^ Radiation Exposure Compensation System: Claims to Date
  29. ^ a b c Benjamin K. Sovacool. The costs of failure: A preliminary assessment of major energy accidents, 1907–2007, Energy Policy 36 (2008), p. 1808.
  30. ^ Michael D. Mehta (2005). Risky business: nuclear power and public protest in Canada Lexington Books, p. 35.
  31. ^ a b c Paula Garb. Review of Critical Masses, Journal of Political Ecology, Vol 6, 1999.
  32. ^ Thomas Raymond Wellock (1998). Critical Masses: Opposition to Nuclear Power in California, 1958-1978, The University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 27-28.
  33. ^ Wolfgang Rudig (1990). Anti-nuclear Movements: A World Survey of Opposition to Nuclear Energy, Longman, p. 61.
  34. ^ a b c d Walker, J. Samuel (2004). Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 10.
  35. ^ a b Wolfgang Rudig (1990). Anti-nuclear Movements: A World Survey of Opposition to Nuclear Energy, Longman, pp. 66-67.
  36. ^ Ann Morrissett Davidon (December 1979). "The U.S. Anti-nuclear Movement". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
  37. ^ a b Mark Hertsgaard (1983). Nuclear Inc. The Men and Money Behind Nuclear Energy, Pantheon Books, New York, p. 72.
  38. ^ Jim Falk (1982). Global Fission: The Battle Over Nuclear Power, Oxford University Press, p. 95.
  39. ^ The San Jose Three TIME, Feb. 16, 1976.
  40. ^ The Struggle over Nuclear Power TIME, Mar. 08, 1976.
  41. ^ a b World Nuclear Association. Three Mile Island Accident January 2010.
  42. ^ Benjamin K. Sovacool. The costs of failure: A preliminary assessment of major energy accidents, 1907–2007, Energy Policy 36 (2008), p. 1807.
  43. ^ Mangano, Joseph (2004). Three Mile Island: Health study meltdown, Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 60(5), pp. 31 -35.
  44. ^ a b Mark Hertsgaard (1983). Nuclear Inc. The Men and Money Behind Nuclear Energy, Pantheon Books, New York, p. 95 & 97.
  45. ^ a b Storm van Leeuwen, Jan (2008). Nuclear power – the energy balance
  46. ^ Wolfgang Rudig (1990). Anti-nuclear Movements: A World Survey of Opposition to Nuclear Energy, Longman, p. 53 & p. 61.
  47. ^ Helen Caldicott (2006). Nuclear power is not the answer to global warming or anything else, Melbourne University Press, ISBN 0-522-85251-3, p.xvii
  48. ^ Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (undated). Why Nuclear is Risky
  49. ^ Amory B. Lovins (1977). Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace, Penguin Books.
  50. ^ Woo, Elaine (January 30, 2011). "Dagmar Wilson dies at 94; organizer of women's disarmament protesters". Los Angeles Times.
  51. ^ Hevesi, Dennis (January 23, 2011). "Dagmar Wilson, Anti-Nuclear Leader, Dies at 94". The New York Times.
  52. ^ a b c d e Williams, Eesha. Wikipedia distorts nuclear history Valley Post, May 1, 2008.
  53. ^ Nuke Fight Nears Decisive Moment Valley Advocate, August 28, 2008.
  54. ^ Michael Kenney. Tracking the protest movements that had roots in New England The Boston Globe, December 30, 2009.
  55. ^ Social Protest and Policy Change p. 44.
  56. ^ Luther J. Carter "Political Fallout from Three Mile Island", Science, 204, April 13, 1979, p. 154.
  57. ^ a b Jon Agnone. Amplifying Public Opinion: The Policy Impact of the U.S. Environmental Movement p. 7.
  58. ^ Social Protest and Policy Change p. 45.
  59. ^ Anti-Nuclear Demonstrations
  60. ^ Shoreham Action Is One of Largest Held Worldwide; 15,000 Protest L.I. Atom Plant; 600 Seized 600 Arrested on L.I. as 15,000 Protest at Nuclear Plant Nuclear Supporter on Hand Governor Stresses Safety Thousands Protest Worldwide New York Times, June 4, 1979.
  61. ^ Gottlieb, Robert (2005). Forcing the Spring: The Transformation of the American Environmental Movement, Revised Edition, Island Press, USA, p. 240.
  62. ^ Hippy Dictionary p.559.
  63. ^ Frank Trippett and Robert W. Hollis. Shutting Down Rancho Seco TIME, June 19, 1989.
  64. ^ Herman, Robin (September 24, 1979). "Nearly 200,000 Rally to Protest Nuclear Energy". New York Times. p. B1. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  65. ^ Arrests Exceed 900 In Coast Nuclear Protest New York Times, September 18, 1981.
  66. ^ Testing and Protesting Time, May 14, 1984.
  67. ^ Hundreds of Marchers Hit Washington in Finale of Nationwaide Peace March Gainsville Sun, November 16, 1986.
  68. ^ 438 Protesters are Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site
  69. ^ Hundreds Arrested Over Seabrook Test New York Times, June 5, 1989.
  70. ^ 493 Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site
  71. ^ Lance Murdoch. Pictures: New York MayDay anti-nuke/war march IndyMedia, 2 may 2005.
  72. ^ Anti-Nuke Protests in New York Fox News, May 2, 2005.
  73. ^ Vermont Yankee nuke plant's critics still at it, 34 years later The Boston Globe, October 28, 2006.
  74. ^ Nuclear power foes not stilled in N.E.
  75. ^ Activists stage anti-nuclear rally
  76. ^ http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iCCU_ylE9gQ1k4cDqzFAPc3dV4qQ?docId=7ba9e8af59f64e3187660edcc19fd06e
  77. ^ Police arrest 64 at California anti-nuclear protest Reuters, April 6, 2007.
  78. ^ Anti-nuclear rally held at test site: Martin Sheen among activists cited by police Las Vegas Review-Journal, April 2, 2007.
  79. ^ For decades, faith has sustained anti-nuclear movement Seattle Times, April 7, 2006.
  80. ^ Bangor Protest Peaceful; 17 Anti-Nuclear Demonstrators Detained and Released Kitsap Sun, January 19, 2008.
  81. ^ Twelve Arrests, But No Violence at Bangor Anti-Nuclear Protest Kitsap Sun, June 1, 2008.
  82. ^ Protest against nuclear reactor Chicago Tribune, October 16, 2008.
  83. ^ Southeast Climate Convergence occupies nuclear facility Indymedia UK, August 8, 2008.
  84. ^ a b Jerry Brown and Rinaldo Brutoco (1997). Profiles in Power: The Anti-nuclear movement and the Dawn of the Solar Age, pp. 195-199.
  85. ^ Herbert P. Kitschelt. Political Opportunity and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1986, p. 68.
  86. ^ a b Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite. Let’s Take Religious Nuclear Opposition to the Next Level Center for American Progress, April 12, 2010.
  87. ^ Green Party USA (undated). The Greens/Green Party USA
  88. ^ Anthony Faiola. Nuclear power regains support The Washington Post, November 24, 2009.
  89. ^ a b Al Gore (2009). Our Choice, Bloomsbury, p. 152.
  90. ^ Al Gore (2009). Our Choice, p. 157.
  91. ^ Lovins, Amory (2005). Winning the Oil Endgame p. 259.
  92. ^ Rocky Mountain Institute (1988). E88-31, Global Warming
  93. ^ Nancy Folbre (March 28, 2011). "Renewing Support for Renewables". New York Times.
  94. ^ a b c Romm, Joe (2008). The Self-Limiting Future of Nuclear Power p. 1.
  95. ^ Earth Policy Institute (2008). The Flawed Economics of Nuclear Power
  96. ^ Brown, Lester R. (2008). PLAN B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization p. 214.
  97. ^ Brown, Lester R. (2008). PLAN B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization p. 215.
  98. ^ a b Worldwatch Institute (2008). Building a Low-Carbon Economy in State of the World 2008, p. 81.
  99. ^ Worldwatch Institute (2008). Building a Low-Carbon Economy in State of the World 2008, p. 80.
  100. ^ The Rise of the Anti-nuclear Power Movement
  101. ^ Ancient Rockers Try to Recharge Anti-Nuclear Movement Business & Media Institute, November 8, 2007.
  102. ^ Falk, Jim (1982). Gobal Fission:The Battle Over Nuclear Power, p. 95.
  103. ^ http://www.ecolo.org/media/articles/articles.in.english/love-indep-24-05-04.htm
  104. ^ http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/BOOK.html
  105. ^ http://news.cnet.com/From-eco-warrior-to-nuclear-champion/2008-13840_3-6228461.html
  106. ^ http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/ElecCostSUM.pdf
  107. ^ http://evworld.com/currents.cfm?jid=84
  108. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Fast_Reactor
  109. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_Bed_Reactor
  110. ^ a b Anthony Faiola. Nuclear power regains support The Washington Post, November 24, 2009.
  111. ^ Southern Co. negotiating on nuke loan guarantees
  112. ^ Anti-nuclear protesters reach capitol Rutland Herald, January 14, 2010.
  113. ^ Wald, Matthew (February 25, 2010). "Vermont Senate Votes to Close Nuclear Plant". The New York Times.
  114. ^ a b Rob Pavey. Groups say new Vogtle reactors need study Augusta Chronicle, April 21, 2010.
  115. ^ Matthew L. Wald. Critics Challenge Safety of New Reactor Design New York Times, April 22, 2010.
  116. ^ Matthew L. Wald. Sluggish Economy Curtails Prospects for Building Nuclear Reactors, The New York Times, October 10, 2010.
  117. ^ Wald, Matthew L. (November 4, 2010). Vermont Nuclear Plant Up for Sale The New York Times.
  118. ^ Leslie Kaufman (March 18, 2011). "Japan Crisis Could Rekindle U.S. Antinuclear Movement". New York Times.
  119. ^ "Vermont Yankee: Countdown to closure". WCAX. March 21, 2011.
  120. ^ a b Martin Finucane (April 6, 2011). "Anti-nuclear sentiment regains its voice at State House rally". Boston.com.
  121. ^ "Fukushima Fallout: 45 Groups and Individuals Petition NRC to Suspend All Nuclear Reactor Licensing and Conduct a "Credible" Three Mile Island-Style Review". Nuclear Power News Today. April 14, 2011.
  122. ^ Renee Schoof (April 12, 2011). "Japan's nuclear crisis comes home as fuel risks get fresh look". McClatchy.
  123. ^ Carly Nairn (14 April 2011). "Anti nuclear movement gears up". San Francisco Bay Guardian.

Bibliography

See also: List of books about nuclear issues and List of films about nuclear issues
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Protests against nuclear energy.

Template:Anti-nuclear

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Anti-nuclear_movement_in_the_United_States&oldid=431857350"