2/25 - Congress: NO 3X Nuclear Loan Program!
Pres. Obama's energy plan includes tripling the loan guarantee program to build several new nuclear reactors to the amount of 54 billion dollars. All that extra money taxpayers have falling out of their pockets can now be used to prop up the nuclear industry instead of researching truly green energy sources like wind, solar, etc..., More of the same, or did someone say change?
As of yet, there is NO SAFE location to dispose of the radioactive nuclear waste left over from nuclear energy. Obama's ally in Nevada, Sen. Harry Reid, has spoken out against Yucca Mt. waste site, citing unsafe geological features such as seismic faults and fractures that would enable water to percolate down to the canister storage site.
Why then would Obama call for opening new nuclear facilities when we don't even know where to put the nuclear waste we have now? Who will be the unlucky people chosen to live downwind from nuclear waste disposal sites?
While U.S. foreign policy spokespeople wag their fingers at Iran for their beginning attempts at uranium enrichment, our so-called "green socialist" President Obama has pledged over $54 billion in taxpayer subsidies to the U.S. nuclear industry for subsidies.
This from HEAL UTAH;
President Obama wants to triple the loan guarantee program for
construction of new nuclear reactors, to $54 billion.
Please note: that at least $8 billion of these are not loan
"guarantees"--they are direct taxpayer loans to wealthy nuclear
utilities from the government's Federal Financing Bank .
In either case this proposal puts American taxpayers are on the hook
if the projects fail, and according to a recent Congressional Budget
Office Study they fail about 50% of the time. But, this is just a
proposal--it's not a done deal.
It is time to take action.
On THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, join thousands of concerned americans who
will be calling their members of Congress as part of NATIONAL
CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND YOUR SENATORS THIS THURSDAY AND TELL
THEM TO STOP THE TRIPLING OF THE NUCLEAR LOAN PROGRAM. You can reach
all of your Congress members at 202-224-3121 (the congressional switch
board will connect you to your representative).
Some quick talking points (from NIRS ) for your calls on Thursday:
* The American people are tired of corporate bailouts. In this
case, taxpayers would provide the loans and take all the risk. The
large utilities would take any profits, and taxpayers would pay for
all losses. That is fundamentally unfair to the American people.
* Congress should wait and see how the current loans (to the Vogtle
reactors in Georgia and likely one or two more reactors) fare before
risking even more taxpayer money on nuclear loans.
* Nuclear power remains dirty and dangerous, as demonstrated by the
recent toxic tritium leaks at the Vermont Yankee reactor and
* It would be folly to repeat the mistakes of the past and
encourage new reactor construction when we still don't know how to
handle the radioactive waste from existing reactors.
* We need to address the climate crisis with the fastest, cheapest,
cleanest and safest means possible of reducing carbon emissions.
Nuclear power is the slowest, most expensive, dirtiest and most
dangerous technology available. And nuclear power is not carbon-free:
its carbon footprint is greater than wind, solar, and energy
* Our goal should be to attain a nuclear-free, carbon-free energy
future. Anyone who believes this isn't possible just isn't paying
This battle won't be won overnight. We don't know when Congress may
vote on Obama's proposal (or even if it will receive a floor vote).
But with the nuclear industry and the administration pushing for it
right now, we need to push back now with as many of your voices as we
Please call your members of congress on Thursday, February 25, with
the simple message: no more radioactive loans! Let's keep those phones
ringing all day long! Use this link to record your call. 
68 S. Main St., Suite 400
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
While Utah, Nevada and other desert states may bear the brunt of nuclear waste disposal, other communities will suffer from excessive radiation exposure and risks of nuclear meltdown if new reactors are planned for their regions. The term "cancer alley" usually indicates higher rates of cancer found occuring downwind of nuclear reactors, even on "good days" with no significant meltdowns or accidents like Three Mile Island or Chernobyl.
from Democracy Now;
"AMY GOODMAN: We turn from nuclear issues in Vermont to Georgia. The news in Vermont follows Obama's announcement last week of $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of the first new nuclear power plants in the United States in close to three decades. The loan guarantees will help the Atlanta-based Southern Company build two more nuclear reactors in Burke County, Georgia, near the city of Augusta. The funds will cover up to 70 percent of the company's portion of the project's costs.
Glenn Carroll is the coordinator of the Georgia-based environmental group Nuclear Watch South. She has been leading efforts against the construction of the new plants. She's joining us from Atlanta.
We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Glenn Carroll. Where were you when President Obama made his announcement of federal guarantees for Southern Power to build these new nuclear power plants?
GLENN CARROLL: Gosh, that's hard to remember, because we knew it was coming, and we were prepared. And we woke up in the morning, and there it was.
AMY GOODMAN: And how have you been organizing? And what is your concern about these two new plants?
GLENN CARROLL: Well, we don't need nuclear power, and it's ridiculously expensive. It causes birth defects and cancer and leaves radioactive waste. We already have four nuclear reactors. We're overbuilt. We don't need it, and we certainly don't need to spend taxpayer money this way.
AMY GOODMAN: Talk about why you think President Obama chose Georgia and Southern Power.
GLENN CARROLL: Well, if you look at the fact that the CEO, David Ratcliffe, of Southern Company has been chair of the Federal Reserve Board, is on the Federal Reserve Board now, they are masters of making money. And that has been part, I think, of their really acing the game plan that was laid out by Bush, offering enticements to utilities to become interested in nukes, when they had not been for thirty years. And Southern Company recognized the game that they were very talented in, and they just got started and worked the system. Their amount of lobbying is quite notorious. And they've been effective at milking the cow, so to speak.
AMY GOODMAN: What are your major concerns about the building of these two plants?
GLENN CARROLL: Well, you know, the concerns about nuclear are pretty basic. It's a deadly poison power. It causes birth defects, which are irrevocable. We have long-lived radioactive nuclear waste that we haven't found any way to manage for the long term. And we don't need it. I brought with me the groundbreaking study, "Carbon-Free, Nuclear-Free," which has proven that we can be off all the poison power—coal, oil and nuclear—by 2040. We don't need it.
AMY GOODMAN: And what kind of organizing is going on in Georgia right now? Very little attention paid last week to anyone organizing against these nuclear power plants, when President Obama made his announcement, although it sounds like you're not alone, and it is very much stretching across the political spectrum, from progressive groups, environmental groups, well, to groups like the Heritage Foundation, deeply concerned about these loan guarantees, these tax-subsidized guarantees for private corporations.
GLENN CARROLL: Politics makes strange bedfellows. Yes. Well—
AMY GOODMAN: Yes?
GLENN CARROLL: Kind of forgot your basic question, as you were explaining that, but yes, OK, here's what we've got—
AMY GOODMAN: How are you organizing?
GLENN CARROLL: —is we've got—right. We have—there's a lawsuit. My group is not involved in that. Five environmental groups have brought a lawsuit against the license. Westinghouse has its own problems. It has not received a license for the type of reactor that we're supposed to use. And across the country, all of the environmental movement is concerned about this particular situation in Georgia, much as we all worked to stop the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada. And I wanted to add that—
AMY GOODMAN: And you have now President Obama, at the same time, saying that he is going to finally shut down that storage facility, which has been extremely unpopular in Nevada. What happens to the nuclear waste all over the country, Glenn Carroll?
GLENN CARROLL: Well, right now it's onsite at the reactor sites all over the country. It's in vulnerable storage, for the most part, which an airplane strike at any of these spent fuel pools would be horrifying to contemplate. We have started to—
AMY GOODMAN: You mean a terrorist attack?
GLENN CARROLL: That's right. Or just a fire in the pool or a leak. I mean, they're vulnerable inherently, but they're also more vulnerable than a reactor to terrorism. Some of the sites have started to move the fuel out of the vulnerable pools into hardened concrete storage. There's room for improvement there, but it is a technology that buys us time to get it together on the nuclear repository.
What I wanted to say in response to your noting that there seems to—you know, their headlines say there isn't an anti-nuclear movement or whatnot. I've been thinking about it. You know, in the last week, I think the debate has become much more wholesome. The news has very much been better at presenting both sides. And I've come to conclude that we have been, for years, being bombarded by a $345 million PR campaign by the nuclear industry, and the media has just sucked it up as if it was news. But now we have news. Now we're looking at $8.3 billion in tax money going, you know, to a big private company who has spent millions in lobbying for this, to build a nuclear plant in Georgia, that doesn't need one.
AMY GOODMAN: Is it a done deal?
GLENN CARROLL: Nope. Far from it. Like I said, the Westinghouse reactor doesn't have a license. Southern Company doesn't have a license. And some of the amazing news that has been coming out, like last year, in 2009, we installed almost 10,000 megawatts of wind power in this country. That's the equivalent of a reactor and a half. You cannot put a reactor up in a year. I think by the time Southern Company is eligible to apply for this money, we are going to have transformed the landscape in this country, the energy landscape, and everybody will know we don't have to throw our borrowed tax money to a big private company to build a reactor.
AMY GOODMAN: Glenn Carroll, I want to thank you for being with us, coordinator of the—
GLENN CARROLL: Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: —environmental group Nuclear Watch South, speaking to us from Atlanta, Georgia. And I think her last comments are a perfect segue into our next discussion, and it's about the news and who is on television."
entire interview found @;
Nuclear Watch South
other new nuclear facilities are planned for Idaho;
"Areva, the largest nuclear supplier in the world, wants to build a $4 billion gas centrifuge uranium enrichment plant in eastern Idaho big enough to fuel 50 nuclear reactors. Areva's profits would go to its home base in France. Areva's product would go all over the world, though not to Idaho. Areva's waste could remain above Idaho's Snake River Aquifer for decades. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission should not license the Areva uranium factory. See "Help Stop Areva" tab above to get involved in the campaign."
more info @;
contribute to this article
add comment to discussion