Building Britain’s first new nuclear reactor since 1995 will cost twice as much as the 2012 Olympics – and by the time it is finished, nuclear power could be a thing of the past. How could the government strike such a bad deal? By Holly Watt
Because of the importance of the debate that continues to rage over the harmful effects of low-level radioactivity, I am sending out a copy of my recent exchanges on this topic in the context of the Canadian Pugwash Group. As you know, nuclear proponents have been for many years eagerly pushing the idea that there is a safe threshold of exposure and that exposures below this threshold are either completely harmless or actually beneficial. The latter claim is called “hormesis”.
Before the discovery of nuclear fission in 1939, Port Hope was the home of a radium refinery. Radium is a radioactive heavy metal, a natural byproduct of uranium, that sold for $70,000 per gram in 1931 when the refinery was built. The radioactive ore came from Port Radium, a mine site located on the eastern shore of Great Bear Lake, in the traditional territory of the nomadic Sahtu-Dene people. Large volumes of radioactive waste were left over from the radium refining operation, and much of this waste was dumped into the Port Hope Harbor and into several deep ravines within the town’s boundaries, freely accessible to children and animals.
The “nuclear renaissance” that we have long waited for is falling short. In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster, the number of new projects has drastically dropped. Among other things, they’ve been plagued by huge cost overruns, lower cost competitors, public fear, an aging workforce, rare required materials, and often unmanageable waste problems.
By Muhammad Riaz Pasha No one would survive a nuclear war between nuclear powered nations to claim victory August 06 Sunday is the anniversary of the Hiroshima nuclear blast: 72 years to the day that an entire city was incinerated at the push of a button. And what’s even more terrifying is that nuclear weapons today […]
The Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (CCNR) finds the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) submitted to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) completely unacceptable, not just in terms of the fine details, but in its fundamental concept. We urge CNSC to reject this EIS.
Learn more about the dangers of radioactivity: “Massive doses of ionizing radiation are deadly, killing any human being within days of exposure. So many molecules are destroyed, and so many organs are damaged, that the body cannot survive. Such damage can be caused by a nuclear explosion.”
Le 7 juillet 2017, alors que l’on fête Tanabata au Japon, qu’Hambourg reçoit le G20 sous les cris des manifestants, que New York vote la prohibition de l’arme nucléaire, que Fukushima tremble sous de nouvelles secousses sismiques au moment où l’on contraint les populations à rentrer vivre dans les zones contaminées, les tensions entre nantis et anéantis se resserrent.
On 7 July 2017, the United Nations adopted a landmark agreement to ban nuclear weapons, known officially as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Here we answer some frequently asked questions about how the treaty will operate. + What activities does the treaty prohibit? The treaty prohibits nations from developing, testing, producing, manufacturing, transferring, […]
No one should be a nuclear supplier or a member of a nuclear supplier group.