Greenwash of the Week: Nuclear Power
Click here to watch all the GOTW’s.
Lieberman-Warner Bill: Dirty energy in the name of climate protection
(This is a guest essay from our ally Cascadia Brian with Rising Tide North America)
On the surface, broad-based solutions to global warming appear to be emerging in Congress. But with even a meager scrubbing of the surface, Senators Lieberman and Warner’s “Climate Security Act” (S. 2191) - which is scheduled to be debated on the Senate floor in June - turns out to be perhaps the greatest greenwash of our generation.
Everyone who cares about the climate and a just energy future would do well to take a cold, hard look at the Lieberman-Warner (L-W) bill. It will frame the climate debate in the US for our generation.
If we don’t stop L-W in it’s tracks and go back to the drawing board for real solutions, we risk our bold local efforts for climate protection being trumped and even overturned by deeply misguided and corrupt federal policies. Sadly, most of the national environmental groups are taking a pass on L-W, not publicly taking a strong stand against the bill despite misgivings. At the moment only Friends of the Earth and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service are taking strong stands against the bill. [some weak-willed environmental groups are even supporting this insane bill!]
The youth climate movement cannot afford to remain neutral and silent on this rapidly moving train. The time for demanding “action” on climate is over, we must define and demand “real action” and speak out against these deadly dangerous distractions.
A few highlights from the bill:
- Besides the inherent problems of carbon trading, the bill gives tradeable carbon permits valued at one trillion dollars to the fossil fuel industry for free.
- The revenue from portion of carbon permits that are auction is directed straight back to back to polluters through hundreds of billions of dollars of subsidies to the coal, oil and automobile industries, and nuclear power.
- According to an aide to Senator Lieberman, the bill “would be the most historic incentive for nuclear in the history of the US“. It is estimated that throughout various incentives in the bill $500 billion could go to nuclear power.
- Carbon permits are given first - before all other auctions - to NEW coal facilities, giving incentive to new coal construction before other forms of energy.
- The bills targets are well below what the UN recommends, especially the short term goals: virtually no national reductions in emissions would occur before 2020.
Friends of the Earth provided one of the first analyses of the bill and kept examining the legislation as it changed. Read the updated analysis of the bill.
Here’s a chart showing who benefits from the bill:
Worse, a number of Nuclear amendments have been discussed on Capitol Hill may include some, or even all, of the following:
- more money for taxpayer loan guarantees for new reactors
- more money for “risk” insurance if reactors are delayed because of interventions or other licensing problems
- establishment of “interim” storage sites for high-level radioactive waste
- speed-up of Yucca Mountain licensing
- further restrictions on public participation in reactor licensing
- money for training nuclear engineers
- money for training skilled workers (like welders)
- money for security guards and improvements
- money for Hardened On-Site Storage
- money to build new factories to manufacture large reactor components
- money for new transmission lines
- money for transformers
Take a stand - contact Friends of the Earth or the Nuclear Information and Resource Service for more information.
Greenwash of the Week: Exelon’s nuclear astro-turfing
This week’s greenwash is a double-whammy: greenwash meets astro-turf. If you’re not familiar with that last term, it refers to a “grassroots” organization that’s actually the phony creation of a powerful, moneyed interest group.
As reported by the good people over at PR Watch and the Asbury Park Press, Exelon, a New Jersey nuclear power provider, paid to lobbyists to set up a front group called the “New Jersey Affordable, Clean, Reliable Energy Coalition.” The mission of the group was to support nuclear in general and license renewal for an aging local plant in particular. Exelon also funded a “study” on the supposedly high cost of shutting down the plant. From PR Watch:
The coalition will “advocate for nuclear energy and, more specifically, a 20-year license extension for the aging Oyster Creek plant” in Lacey, N.J. However, “the lobbyists neglected to point out they are being paid by Exelon Corp., Oyster Creek’s owner. There also was no mention of that fact on the coalition’s Web site until a news story about their being front men for Exelon appeared in Friday’s Asbury Park Press.” Since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission “is expected to reach a decision on relicensing by January,” reasons the paper, “much of the lobbyists’ energy will be directed at the decision-makers themselves.” Judging by a press release, one of NJ ACRE’s arguments is that “the loss of Oyster Creek and the need to replace its electricity in the face of steadily rising demand would cause significant economic hardship.” The release says shutting down Oyster Creek would cost $190 million in increased energy prices and $126 million in lost “economic activity,” citing a study funded by Exelon.
For more on the trouble with nuclear power, check out Toben’s post from last month. RAN recently signed on to this simple statement about nuclear power, reproduced in its entirety below:
“We do not support construction of new nuclear reactors as a means of
addressing the climate crisis. Available renewable energy and energy
efficiency technologies are faster, cheaper, safer and cleaner
strategies for reducing greenhouse emissions than nuclear power.”