Anti-nuclear movement in the United States: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 13: Line 13:


===History relating to nuclear power===
===History relating to nuclear power===

[[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.<ref name=well>[http://jpe.library.arizona.edu/volume_6/wellockvol6.htm Journal of Political Ecology, Vol 6, 1999.]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://books.google.com.au/books?id=4zigZvQ1wm8C&dq=bodega+bay+nuclear&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=oRUqSu_BE9iOkAXoj_H4Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=12#PPP1,M1 Critical Masses] pp. 27-28.</ref> 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.<ref name=well/> Attempts to build a nuclear power plant in [[Malibu]] were similar to those at Bodega Bay and were also abandoned.<ref name=well/>

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. 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.<ref name=ten>Walker, J. Samuel (2004). ''[[Three Mile Island (book)|Three Mile Island]]: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective'' (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 10.</ref>
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. 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.<ref name=ten>Walker, J. Samuel (2004). ''[[Three Mile Island (book)|Three Mile Island]]: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective'' (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 10.</ref>

Revision as of 20:56, 6 June 2009

The anti-nuclear movement in the United States consists of more than sixty anti-nuclear groups opposing nuclear power and/or nuclear weapons in the USA. The movement has acted to delay construction or halt commitments to build some new nuclear plants.[1][2]

Anti-nuclear campaigns that captured national public attention in the 1970s 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] More recent campaigning has related to several nuclear power plants, the proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository,[3][4] the Hanford Site, the Nevada Test Site,[5] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,[6] and transportation of nuclear waste from the Los Alamos National Laboratory.[7]

A number of scientists and engineers have expressed reservations about nuclear power, including: Barry Commoner, S. David Freeman, John Gofman, Amory Lovins, Arjun Makhijani, Gregory Minor and Joseph Romm.

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

Origins of the movement

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

History relating to nuclear power

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.[8] 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.[9] 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.[8] Attempts to build a nuclear power plant in Malibu were similar to those at Bodega Bay and were also abandoned.[8]

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. 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.[10]

Another concern was the effect of radiation emissions from nuclear plants. Several scientists 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. This exchange of views about radiation risks caused further uneasiness about nuclear power, especially among those unable to evaluate the conflicting claims.[10]

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.[11]

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.[12] They testified to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy that:

"the cumulative effect of all design defects and deficiences 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.[12]

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 magazine, in the September 1975 issue, reported that "the anti-nuclear coalition has been remarkably successful ... [and] has certainly slowed the expansion of nuclear power." By the mid-1970s anti-nuclear activism 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.[11]

Complexity of nuclear power

Nuclear power plants are one of the most complex energy systems ever designed,[13] and opponents of nuclear power have criticized the sophistication and complexity of the technology. In their assessment, "nuclear power is a very dangerous, expensive way to boil water to generate energy..."[14] Dr Helen Caldicott has said: "... in essence, a nuclear reactor is just a very sophisicated and dangerous way to boil water -- analogous to cutting a pound of butter with a chain saw."[15] These critics of nuclear power advocate the use of energy conservation, efficient energy use, and appropriate renewable energy technologies to create our energy future.[14]

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 their impacts are seen to be more gentle, pleasant, and manageable than hard energy technologies such as nuclear power.[16]

An issue related to complexity is that the nuclear energy systems have an exceedingly 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.[13]

History relating to nuclear weapons

A nuclear fireball lights up the night in a United States nuclear test.

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).[17] 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 regulated 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. Estimating exact numbers, and the exact consequences, of people exposed has been medically very difficult.

Anti-nuclear protests

Main article: List of 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

Marco Giugni, in his book Social Protest and Policy Change, explains that several anti-nuclear 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:[18][19]

  • May 2, 1977: 1,414 protesters were arrested at the Seabrook nuclear power plant in New Hampshire.
  • June 1978: some 12,000 people attended a protest at Seabrook.
  • August 1978: almost 500 people were arrested for protesting at the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in California.
  • 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[20] and enhanced the credibility of anti-nuclear groups, who predicted an accident.[21]
  • 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.
  • June 2, 1979: about 500 people were arrested for protesting construction of the Black Fox Nuclear Power Plant in Oklahoma.
  • June 3, 1979: some 15,000 people attended a rally at the Shoreham nuclear power plant on Long Island, N.Y. and about 600 were arrested.
  • June 30, 1979: about 38,000 people attended a protest rally at Diablo Canyon.
  • 1979: Abalone Alliance members held a 38-day sit-in in the 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.[22] In 1989, Sacremento voters voted to shut down the Rancho Seco power plant.[23]
  • 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.[24] 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.
  • September 1981: more than 900 protesters were arrested at Diablo Canyon.[25]
  • May 1984: about 130 demonstrators showed up for start-up day at Diablo Canyon, and five were arrested.[26]
  • 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.[27]
  • 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.[28]
  • 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.[29]
  • 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.[30]
  • October 16, 2006: 26 people were arrested outside the Brattleboro offices of Vermont Yankee owner Entergy Nuclear; the demonstration drew about 200 people.[31]
  • 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.[32][33]

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.[34] 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.[35] There have been anti-nuclear protests at Naval Base Kitsap for many years, and several in 2008.[36][37][38] Also in 2008 and 2009, there have been protests about several proposed nuclear reactors.[39][40]

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 and/or nuclear weapons. More than sixty anti-nuclear groups are operating, or have operated, in the United States. These include:

Recent campaigning by anti-nuclear groups has related to several nuclear power plants including the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Plant,[41][42] Indian Point Energy Center,[43] Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,[44] Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station,[45] Salem Nuclear Power Plant,[46] and Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant.[11] There have also been campaigns relating to the Idaho National Laboratory,[47] proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository,[4] the Hanford Site, the Nevada Test Site,[5] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,[6] and transportation of nuclear waste from the Los Alamos National Laboratory.[7]

Political parties

The Platform adopted by the delegates of the membership of the Greens/Green Party USA (G/GPUSA) at their annual Green Congress, meeting in Chicago, May 26-28, 2000, reflecting the majority views of the G/GPUSA membership, includes 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.[48]

People with anti-nuclear views

There are several prominent Americans who hold pro-nuclear views, and these are discussed in the Anti-nuclear movement article. There are also people with anti-nuclear views.

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.[49]

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.[50]

Joseph Romm

Joseph Romm explains 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.[51] Yet, Romm argues, nuclear power’s "own myriad limitations will constrain its growth, especially in the near term", and the limitations include:[51]

  • 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 waste storage.
  • Large-scale water use amid shortages.
  • High electricity prices from new plants.

Lester Brown

Lester Brown argues that nuclear power is simply not economical,[52] 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.[53]

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

Perhaps the quickest, easiest, and most profitable way to reduce electricity use worldwide—thus cutting carbon emissions—is simply to change light bulbs. Replacing the inefficient incandescent light bulbs that are still widely used today with new compact fluorescents (CFLs) can reduce electricity use by three fourths. The energy saved by replacing a 100-watt incandescent bulb with an equivalent CFL over its lifetime is sufficient to drive a Toyota Prius hybrid car from New York to San Francisco.[54]

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, points out that speedy implementation is not one of nuclear power’s strong points:[55]

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.[55]

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.[56]

Other people

Other notable individuals who have expressed reservations about nuclear power in the US include:[57][58][59][60]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c Giugni, Marco (2004). Social Protest and Policy Change: Ecology, Antinuclear, and Peace Movements p. 44.
  2. ^ Lights Out at Shoreham: Anti-nuclear activism spurs the closing of a new $6 billion plant Newsday.com, undated.
  3. ^ Four Score Organizations Express Opposition to Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Dump Commondreams.org, January 11, 2008.
  4. ^ a b Sierra Club. (undated). Deadly Nuclear Waste Transport
  5. ^ a b 22 Arrested in Nuclear Protest New York Times, August 10, 1989.
  6. ^ a b Hundreds Protest at Livermore Lab The TriValley Herald, August 11, 2003.
  7. ^ a b Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (undated). About CCNS
  8. ^ a b c Journal of Political Ecology, Vol 6, 1999.
  9. ^ Critical Masses pp. 27-28.
  10. ^ a b Walker, J. Samuel (2004). Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 10.
  11. ^ a b c Walker, J. Samuel (2004). Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 10-11.
  12. ^ a b Mark Hertsgaard (1983). Nuclear Inc. The Men and Money Behind Nuclear Energy, Pantheon Books, New York, p. 72.
  13. ^ a b Storm van Leeuwen, Jan (2008). Nuclear power – the energy balance
  14. ^ a b Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (undated). Why Nuclear is Risky
  15. ^ 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
  16. ^ Amory B. Lovins (1977). Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace, Penguin Books.
  17. ^ Carey Sublette, "Gallery of U.S. Nuclear Tests", online at http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/
  18. ^ Wikipedia distorts nuclear history Rutland Herald, May 1, 2008.
  19. ^ Nuke Fight Nears Decisive Moment Valley Advocate, August 28, 2008.
  20. ^ Mark Hertsgaard (1983). Nuclear Inc. The Men and Money Behind Nuclear Energy, Pantheon Books, New York, p. 95 & 97.
  21. ^ Luther J. Carter "Political Fallout from Three Mile Island", Science, 204, April 13 1979, p. 154.
  22. ^ Hippy Dictionary p.559.
  23. ^ Shutting Down Rancho Seco
  24. ^ Herman, Robin (September 24, 1979). "Nearly 200,000 Rally to Protest Nuclear Energy". New York Times. p. B1. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  25. ^ Arrests Exceed 900 In Coast Nuclear Protest New York Times, September 18, 1981.
  26. ^ Testing and Protesting Time, May 14, 1984.
  27. ^ 438 Protesters are Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site
  28. ^ Hundreds Arrested Over Seabrook Test New York Times, June 5, 1989.
  29. ^ 493 Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site
  30. ^ Pictures: New York MayDay anti-nuke/war march Indymedia, May 02, 2005.
  31. ^ Vermont Yankee nuke plant's critics still at it, 34 years later The Boston Globe, October 28, 2006.
  32. ^ Nuclear power foes not stilled in N.E.
  33. ^ Activists stage anti-nuclear rally
  34. ^ Police arrest 64 at California anti-nuclear protest Reuters, April 6, 2007.
  35. ^ Anti-nuclear rally held at test site: Martin Sheen among activists cited by police Las Vegas Review-Journal, April 2, 2007.
  36. ^ For decades, faith has sustained anti-nuclear movement Seattle Times, April 7, 2006.
  37. ^ Bangor Protest Peaceful; 17 Anti-Nuclear Demonstrators Detained and Released Kitsap Sun, January 19, 2008.
  38. ^ Twelve Arrests, But No Violence at Bangor Anti-Nuclear Protest Kitsap Sun, June 1, 2008.
  39. ^ Protest against nuclear reactor Chicago Tribune, October 16, 2008.
  40. ^ Southeast Climate Convergence occupies nuclear facility Indymedia UK, August 8, 2008.
  41. ^ Groups petition against new nuclear plant
  42. ^ Fermi 3 opposition takes legal action to block new nuclear reactor
  43. ^ Hudson River Lovers Fight to Shutter Aging Nuclear Power Plant
  44. ^ Oyster Creek's time is up, residents tell board Examiner, June 28, 2007.
  45. ^ Pilgrim Watch (undated). Pilgrim Watch
  46. ^ Unplugsalem.org (undated). UNPLUG Salem
  47. ^ Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free (2003). Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free
  48. ^ Green Party USA (undated). The Greens/Green Party USA
  49. ^ Lovins, Amory (2005). Winning the Oil Endgame p. 259.
  50. ^ Rocky Mountain Institute (1988). E88-31, Global Warming
  51. ^ a b Romm, Joe (2008). The Self-Limiting Future of Nuclear Power p. 1.
  52. ^ Earth Policy Institute (2008). The Flawed Economics of Nuclear Power
  53. ^ Brown, Lester R. (2008). PLAN B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization p. 214.
  54. ^ Brown, Lester R. (2008). PLAN B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization p. 215.
  55. ^ a b Worldwatch Institute (2008). Building a Low-Carbon Economy in State of the World 2008, p. 81.
  56. ^ Worldwatch Institute (2008). Building a Low-Carbon Economy in State of the World 2008, p. 80.
  57. ^ The Rise of the Anti-nuclear Power Movement
  58. ^ Ancient Rockers Try to Recharge Anti-Nuclear Movement Business & Media Institute, November 8, 2007.
  59. ^ Beyond Nuclear (undated). A Welcome from Ed Asner, Honorary Chairman
  60. ^ Falk, Jim (1982). Gobal Fission:The Battle Over Nuclear Power, p. 95.

Further reading

  • Cragin, Susan (2007). Nuclear Nebraska: The Remarkable Story of the Little County That Couldn’t Be Bought.
  • Dickerson, Carrie B. and Patricia Lemon (1995). Black Fox: Aunt Carrie's War Against the Black Fox Nuclear Power Plant, ISBN 1571780092
  • Giugni, Marco (2004). Social Protest and Policy Change.
  • Jasper, James M. (1997). The Art of Moral Protest: Culture, Biography, and Creativity in Social Movements, University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0226394816
  • McCafferty, David P. (1991). The Politics of nuclear power: A history of the Shoreham power plant.
  • Miller, Byron A. (2000). Geography and social movements: Comparing anti-nuclear activism in the Boston area.
  • Natti, Susanna and Acker, Bonnie (1979). No nukes: Everyone's guide to nuclear power.
  • Ondaatje, Elizabeth H. (c1988). Trends in antinuclear protests in the United States, 1984-1987.
  • Peterson, Christian (2003). Ronald Reagan and Antinuclear Movements in the United States and Western Europe, 1981-1987.
  • Polletta, Francesca (2002). Freedom Is an Endless Meeting: Democracy in American Social Movements, University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0226674495
  • Smith, Jennifer (Editor), (2002). The Antinuclear Movement.
  • Wellock, Thomas R. (1998). Critical Masses: Opposition to Nuclear Power in California, 1958-1978, The University of Wisconsin Press, ISBN 0299158500
  • Wills, John (2006). Conservation Fallout: Nuclear Protest at Diablo Canyon.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-nuclear_movement_in_the_United_States&oldid=294849898"