NYC Actions to Shut Indian Point


NYC actions
Citizens Demand To Close
Indian Point Nuclear Plant

We, residents of the Hudson Valley and the metropolitan New York and New Jersey areas, are demanding that the licensing renewals for the Indian Point nuclear power plant for 2013 and 2015 be denied, and that the plant is closed down as soon as possible. Studies have shown that with upgrades in the New York State power grid, with energy efficiency and conservation measures, and investment in renewable sources, Indian Point’s capacity can be replaced with minimal cost to consumers.

Close the Indian Point
Nuclear Power Plant
-via Credo

To: Members of Congress: Senator Barbara Boxer, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator Chuck Schumer, Senator Ron Wyden, Senator Bernie Sanders, Representative Eliot Engel, Representative Nita Lowey, Representative Sean Patrick Maloney.

Stop the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from relicensing the Indian Point nuclear reactors 2 and 3.

Read More

Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump

Hello all C.A.N.ers! This past week we, as the Coalition Against Nukes, USA, signed onto a powerful letter to the newly elected Canadian premier and his newly appointed environmental minister to say a big NO to the insane idea of burying nuclear waste on the shores of our Great Lake Huron. Please, as this decision looms, make your voices heard by emailing your opposition to the email addresses below. NO NUKES!!!!!


Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear DumpRead More

Exelon seems to think the rules are for others"> Thumbnail for 726340

Cover sheet of NRC letter to Exelon raising questions about the company’s efforts to reclassify public documents on emergency planning.

It might seem that we’re guilty of dumping on Exelon in these pages, which is possibly true, especially since there is an apparently endless supply of Exelon-initiated issues worthy of bringing to public attention. After all, Exelon is the nation’s largest electric utility, the largest nuclear utility, and while we haven’t developed a test for this yet, quite likely the nation’s greediest electric utility.

Still, consider this one from Crain’s Chicago Business Review, which has been doing a great job of trying to hold Exelon accountable: it turns out that while Exelon has been pleading poverty in Springfield, Illinois–home of the Illinois legislature–and loudly proclaiming it needs a bailout to keep at least three uneconomic reactors operating; when the company goes to Wall Street, Exelon paints quite a different picture of its current–and apparently lucrative–financial standing.

This is what naked greed looks like, folks. The question is, now that Exelon has been caught on it, will anyone’s cheeks in the executive suite turn even a modest shade of pink? Unlikely, unless this backfires so much that the legislature actually stops a bailout.

That kind of attitude at Exelon, that it doesn’t need to even consider playing by the rules, has apparently seeped down through the rest of the company and its staff.

Last week, the NRC slammed the company for trying to reclassify and keep from public disclosure basic emergency planning documents, many of which are already public. In other words, Exelon is trying to take public documents related to emergency response planning (this is not about plutonium disposition or armed guards at nuclear reactors, this is about basic public safety information the public clearly has the right to know) and make it secret. For, as far as the NRC can tell–and the NRC usually rubber-stamps these kind of requests if they’re not too outrageous–no legitimate reason whatsoever. In fact, this request has reached “too outrageous.”

You can find the whole NRC document by searching the agency’s ADAMS database for this document number: ML16098A322. We’ve reproduced two of the ten pages here, one at the top and one below.

What is most disturbing about this is not really the idea of making legitimately-public documents secret, although that is certainly repugnant. Rather, it’s the attitude that permeates Exelon that the rules don’t apply to them, that if they yell and complain longly and loudly enough they can get anything they want. When that kind of attitude extends into the operations of nuclear power plants, nothing but trouble will follow. And that’s the kind of trouble that none of us, not even Exelon, needs.

Michael Mariotte

May 2, 2016


Your contributions make publication of GreenWorld possible. If you value GreenWorld, please make a tax-deductible donation here and ensure our continued publication. We gratefully appreciate every donation of any size.

Comments are welcome on all GreenWorld posts! Say your piece. Start a discussion. Don’t …read moreRead More

Nuclear Leak in Kakrapar, Questions Unanswered Even After A Month"> Thumbnail for 718263

Nuclear physicist Dr M V Ramana from Princeton University is not satisfied with the AERB’s explanation and questions how the AERB can make a blanket statement stating, ‘There has not been any report of abnormal radioactivity releases/radiation exposures to any personnel during this incident.’

The post Nuclear Leak in Kakrapar, Questions Unanswered Even After A Month appeared first on

…read moreRead More

In recent weeks major news organizations, researchers and bloggers have been marking the passing of thirty years since the Chernobyl catastrophe. So many articles have appeared that it would be difficult to write something original that covers new ground. Many clichés have entered into the topic, and as a result […]

The post Top stories from around the web on Chernobyl 1986-2016 appeared first on

…read moreRead More

How to take on the nuclear shills: here’s one approach."> Thumbnail for 717724

Exelon’s aging, unprofitable Quad Cities reactors.

Earlier this month, we reported that climate scientist Dr. James Hansen and the pro-nuclear Breakthrough Institute’s Michael Shellenberger had leaped–apparently on their own–into the battle over the future of some of Exelon’s unprofitable nuclear reactors in Illinois.

In a nutshell, Exelon wants a taxpayer and/or ratepayer (it doesn’t really care where the money comes from) bailout to ensure that Exelon will receive a profit, whether the reactors themselves are profitable or not. They aren’t, and a Clinton reactor official (the most endangered of Exelon’s fleet) said this week that even with a bailout Clinton wouldn’t be profitable for “five to seven years.”

Since Clinton’s competition, primarily wind and natural gas at present, already is profitable, the only argument Exelon has been able to make is that closing Clinton (and two units at Quad Cities) would cause carbon emissions in the state to rise. That’s where Hansen and Shellenberger, and Shellenberger’s new group Environmental Progress Illinois (EPI), jumped in. Not that it’s easy to make the case that the fate of the planet depends on whether three aging, uneconomic, and dirty in many other ways reactors operate long enough to keep Exelon’s wallets full for another few years….

Nonetheless, EPI sent a letter to state legislators trying to make its case. Our friends at Chicago’s Nuclear Energy Information Service (NEIS) thought that letter missed a few points, so sent their own version of it to the legislature, reproduced here.
Microsoft Word - ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS LETTER TO IL LEGISLATUREState legislators rarely are energy experts. The nuclear industry and electric utilities have spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the past few years in efforts to both convince legislators that climate action isn’t necessary in the first place, but that if it is, then nuclear power is clean, “emissions-free” energy. Advocates of genuinely clean energy don’t, of course, have those kinds of resources. But it costs nothing to reach this very targeted audience with a message that both exposes the lies of the nuclear industry and the illusion that nuclear is clean energy and makes the case for renewables, efficiency, and a 21st century electric system.

Go ahead, try this at home! Take on your own local nuclear advocates and turn their own words against them. It’s fun and you may be surprised: perhaps you’ll even begin to force these powerful, non-expert legislators to raise questions and face the notion that someone has been misleading them–and it isn’t us.

Michael Mariotte

April 25, 2016


Your contributions make publication of GreenWorld possible. If you value GreenWorld, please make a tax-deductible donation here and ensure our continued publication. We gratefully appreciate every donation of any size.

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

If you’d like to receive GreenWorld via e-mail, send your name and e-mail address to and we’ll send you an invitation. …read moreRead More

New radwaste plan is another “con” from DOE"> Thumbnail for 708571

Likely transport routes and amounts of radwaste that would be sent to Yucca Mountain, Nevada, if that proposal should be resurrected.

The Department of Energy (DOE) has a new generation of leadership; “larger than life” John Kotek is promoting nuclear energy via selling a “durable solution” to the problem of deadly radioactive waste that is the direct result of generating electric power from the heat of fission. Without a perceived solution to handling this existential problem, promotion of more nuclear energy usually falls on deaf ears. After all, wastes that will be a hazard to all life on Earth over the next million years, even when contained, do pose a threat. And the DOE’s track record on radioactive waste, exemplified by the failed Yucca Mountain project, hardly inspires confidence.

So Kotek has a new plan: volunteers. He wants states and communities to “consent” to storing nuclear waste in their jurisdictions. His process? Hold a bunch of meetings to put out the “welcome mat,” and work to get Congress to gut the existing Nuclear Waste Policy Act, greasing the skids for two locations where nuclear corporations are volunteering rural areas of New Mexico and Texas for new waste sites.

I went to Atlanta on Monday, April 11, to participate in one of these public meetings, the third in a series of nine that the DOE is hosting across the U.S. Next up is Sacramento this month, on Chernobyl Day (April 26) in fact. That will be followed by Denver, Boston, Tempe, Boise, and Minneapolis–about every two weeks until the end of July. Go here for dates, times and locations as well as registration information.

The Atlanta meeting was surreal. Half the room were career nuclear waste professionals, including myself…we all recognize each other and can pretty much predict exactly what each will say…who needs a meeting? Nearly a third of the room is paid meeting staff—many crossovers from the DOE’s two-year “Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future” (or “BRC”) now sporting consulting firm names like “North Wind.” Long-time NRC facilitator Chip Cameron is on the team.

Georgia Governor Perdue opened the session asking us to “solve the waste problem now, and don’t leave it to our grandchildren.” I wanted to yell it was too late for that, since no matter what this was is going to be around for thousands of generations to come! He was followed by Kotek since the video of Secretary of Energy Moniz malfunctioned. Then a four-person panel gave short viewpoints. Mindy Goldstein, from the Turner Law Clinic did a great job, talking fast to get in as many points as possible. She was bracketed by a man named Bubba with the Public Service Commission of Georgia, Rick McLeod, top advocate for everything nuclear over at the Savannah River Site (DOE nuclear-bomb production site), and a social-science professor who seems to believe that DOE is acting in good faith. He assumes that the Department actually intends to launch a full-scale community-based negotiated “consent” process. Later, this professor is …read moreRead More