Anti-nuclear movement: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 268: Line 268:
{{See also|Nuclear energy policy|Nuclear free zone|Anti-nuclear movement in Australia}}
{{See also|Nuclear energy policy|Nuclear free zone|Anti-nuclear movement in Australia}}


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.<ref name=eleven/> [[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."<ref name=eleven/>
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 attention.<ref name=eleven>Walker, J. Samuel (2004). ''[http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tf0AfoynG-EC&dq=Three+Mile+Island:+A+Nuclear+Crisis+in+Historical+Perspective&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=OouUwdMQpH&sig=GkKocK36A1bZhmqt_Nm4O6zWQKw&hl=en&ei=lFtKS7TIDY3U7AOKq_jXCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective]'' (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 10-11.</ref> [[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."<ref name=eleven/>


For many years after the 1986 [[Chernobyl disaster]] nuclear power was off the policy agenda in most countries. More recently, intense public relations activities by the nuclear industry, increasing evidence of climate change and failures to address it, have brought nuclear power issues back to the forefront of policy discussion in the [[nuclear renaissance]] countries.<ref name=res/> But some countries are not prepared to expand nuclear power and are still divesting themselves of their nuclear legacy.<ref name=res>[http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS101123+06-May-2009+BW20090506 Research and Markets: International Perspectives on Energy Policy and the Role of Nuclear Power] ''Reuters'', May 6, 2009.</ref>
For many years after the 1986 [[Chernobyl disaster]] nuclear power was off the policy agenda in most countries. More recently, intense public relations activities by the nuclear industry, increasing evidence of climate change and failures to address it, have brought nuclear power issues back to the forefront of policy discussion in the [[nuclear renaissance]] countries.<ref name=res/> But some countries are not prepared to expand nuclear power and are still divesting themselves of their nuclear legacy.<ref name=res>[http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS101123+06-May-2009+BW20090506 Research and Markets: International Perspectives on Energy Policy and the Role of Nuclear Power] ''Reuters'', May 6, 2009.</ref>

Revision as of 23:08, 10 January 2010

Anti-nuclear protests in Bonn, Germany, on October 14, 1979.
Anti-nuclear demonstration in Colmar, north-eastern France, October 3, 2009.

The anti-nuclear movement is an international social movement that opposes the use of various nuclear technologies. Both grassroots organizations and political parties have identified themselves with the movement. Major anti-nuclear groups include Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.

The initial objective of the anti-nuclear movement was nuclear disarmament. Later the focus began to shift to other issues, such as the use of nuclear power, food irradiation, and the use of depleted uranium munitions. Activities include opposition to the construction of new nuclear plants, protesting against the transport and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, opposing uranium mining, and public information campaigns highlighting the perceived and real risks of radiation and nuclear technologies.

The largest anti-nuclear protest was a 1983 nuclear weapons protest in West Berlin which had about 600,000 participants. A large protest against nuclear power occurred in June 1976 in Bilbao, Spain, with 200,000 people in attendance. Following the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, a large anti-nuclear protest was held in New York City, involving 200,000 people. In 1981, Germany's largest anti-nuclear power demonstration took place to protest against the Brokdorf Nuclear Power Plant west of Hamburg; some 100,000 people came face to face with 10,000 police officers. In May 1986, following the Chernobyl disaster, an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 people marched in Rome to protest against the Italian nuclear program. Also in 1986, hundreds of people walked from Los Angeles to Washington DC in the Great Peace March for Global Nuclear Disarmament.

For many years after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster nuclear power was off the policy agenda in most countries, and the anti-nuclear power movement seemed to have won its case. Some anti-nuclear groups disbanded. More recently, however, following public relations activities by the nuclear industry, and concerns about climate change, nuclear power issues have come back into energy policy discussions in some countries. Anti-nuclear activity has increased correspondingly and countries such as Australia and Ireland remain opposed to the use of nuclear power.

History and issues

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

Roots of the movement

Initially, the nuclear debate was mainly about nuclear weapons policy and was located within the scientific community. Professional associations such as the Federation of Atomic Scientists and the Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs were involved. In 1962, Linus Pauling won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work to stop the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons, and the "Ban the Bomb" movement spread.[1]

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.[2] 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.[3] 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.[2] Attempts to build a nuclear power plant in Malibu were similar to those at Bodega Bay and were also abandoned.[2]

Anti-nuclear concerns

See also: Nuclear debate, List of civilian nuclear accidents, List of civilian radiation accidents, and List of crimes involving radioactive substances

In the 1960s, the environmental movement grew mainly in reaction to obvious deterioration of the natural and urban environments. Although some environmentalists favoured nuclear energy as a way to reduce pollution, the majority came to the movement with already-formed anti-nuclear attitudes, and at present the anti-nuclear movement and the environmental movement have considerable overlap.[4] Opponents of nuclear energy used the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty of 1968 to reinforce the connections between the international export and development of nuclear power technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Finally, because nuclear power has always been a technology which requires and employs specialists, some individuals view it as an elitist technology.[5]

Much early opposition to nuclear power was expressed in relation to environmental grounds: thermal pollution, known and postulated reactor accidents, potential release of radiation during shipments, and still-developing means for long-term radioactive waste storage and disposal. The environmental movement made such concerns well-known. By the time of the rise of New England's Clamshell Alliance, California's Abalone Alliance, and dozens of similar regional groups dedicated to stopping the growth of nuclear power through nonviolent civil disobedience based actions, points of opposition had expanded from concerns about pollution and proliferation to include concerns about economic viability and terrorist target threats.[6]

President Jimmy Carter leaving the Three Mile Island accident for Middletown, Pennsylvania, April 1, 1979.
The abandoned city of Prypiat, Ukraine, following the Chernobyl disaster. The Chernobyl nuclear power plant is in the background.

Nuclear power plants are some of the most sophisticated and complex energy systems ever designed,[7] and anti-nuclear critics have seen nuclear power as a dangerous, expensive way to boil water to generate electricity.[8] Any complex system, no matter how well it is designed and engineered, cannot be deemed failure-proof. This is especially true if people are required to operate controls that dictate how the system functions.[9] Stephanie Cooke has reported that:

The reactors themselves were enormously complex machines with an incalculable number of things that could go wrong. When that happened at Three Mile Island in 1979, another fault line in the nuclear world was exposed. One malfunction led to another, and then to a series of others, until the core of the reactor itself began to melt, and even the world's most highly trained nuclear engineers did not know how to respond. The accident revealed serious deficiencies in a system that was meant to protect public health and safety.[10]

Nuclear accidents are often cited by anti-nuclear groups as evidence of the inherent danger of nuclear power. The worst nuclear accident in history is the Chernobyl disaster. Other serious nuclear and radiation accidents include the Mayak disaster, Soviet submarine K-431 accident, Soviet submarine K-19 accident, Three Mile Island accident, Costa Rica radiotherapy accident, Zaragoza radiotherapy accident, Goiania accident, Windscale fire, Church Rock Uranium Mill Spill and the SL-1 accident.

Also, according to anti-nuclear organisations, rendering nuclear waste harmless is not being done satisfactorily and it remains a hazard for anywhere between a few years to many thousands of years (although the same organisations usually oppose, and lobby against, processing the waste to reduce its radioactivity and longevity).[11][12][13] There is an "international consensus on the advisability of storing nuclear waste in deep underground repositories",[14] but no country in the world has yet opened such a site.[14][15][16][17][18]

The economics and nuclear proliferation issues are also primary concerns.

Some anti-nuclear groups also oppose research into nuclear fusion power.[19]

Nuclear-free alternatives

See also: Renewable energy commercialisation and Non-nuclear future
Three renewable energy sources: solar energy, wind power, and biomass.

Anti-nuclear groups generally claim that reliance on nuclear energy can be reduced by adopting energy conservation and energy efficiency measures. Anti-nuclear groups also favour the development of distributed generation of renewable energy, such as biomass (wood fuel and biofuel), wind power and solar power.[20] According to the International Energy Agency, renewable energy technologies are essential contributors to the energy supply portfolio, as they contribute to world energy security, reduce dependency on fossil fuels, and provide opportunities for mitigating greenhouse gases.[21] Climate-disrupting fossil fuels are being replaced by clean, climate-stabilizing, non-depletable sources of energy:

...the transition from coal, oil, and gas to wind, solar, and geothermal energy is well under way. In the old economy, energy was produced by burning something — oil, coal, or natural gas — leading to the carbon emissions that have come to define our economy. The new energy economy harnesses the energy in wind, the energy coming from the sun, and heat from within the earth itself.[22]

Greenpeace advocates reduction of fossil fuels by 50% by 2050 as well as phasing out nuclear energy, contending that innovative technologies can increase energy efficiency, and suggests that by 2050 the majority of electricity will be generated from renewable sources.[23] The International Energy Agency estimates that nearly 50% of global electricity supplies will need to come from renewable energy sources in order to halve carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 and minimise significant, irreversible climate change impacts.[24]

Anti-nuclear organisations

Main article: List of anti-nuclear groups
Logo of Nuclear Information and Resource Service
Logo of Nuclear Information and Resource Service

International organisations

National and local

Symbols

A symbol of the anti-nuclear movement is a smiling red sun, usually on a yellow background. There are several variations, such as a raised fist or angry face. It is often accompanied by the slogan "Nuclear power? No thanks!" This symbol has its roots in the Danish anti-nuclear movement in the 1970s and has since gained worldwide usage.

A symbol of resistance against nuclear waste transport is a (mostly yellow) X. This symbol is newer than the smiling sun. It originated in the German anti-nuclear movement.

Activities

The movement uses a number of methods to influence policy and gain publicity. Many prominent institutionalised groups advocate non-violent direct action. Others have taken violent direct action (such as rocket attacks on the Superphénix site). Types of actions taken include:

  • Propaganda
    • Websites. Many anti-nuclear groups maintain websites which include information on nuclear technology.
    • Demonstrations and information desks. Many nuclear power opponents man information desks and organise demonstrations. These, however, gain little attention from the press and the public if they are not very large. Forms of demonstrations may include:
    • Concerts. The best known concerts were the No-Nukes concerts by MUSE at Madison Square Garden in 1979, in response to the Three Mile Island accident.
    • Picketing
    • A Die-in - this has been done by groups such as Stop Rokkasho [26]
  • Non-violent direct action. Similar to a Sit-in, this kind of action is commonly considered civil disobedience. Examples include:
    • Blockages. Nuclear transports or nuclear plants have been blocked by protesters. This leads to large-size blockades with several thousand people, based on the principle of nonviolence, but also smaller demonstrations happen. In Germany, if a blockade states that it is not coercive, there are no severe legal repercussions to the activists. In Austria, a blockade was staged in protest of the Temelin Nuclear Power Plant across the Czech Republic border (critics of the movement saw this action as nationalistic).
  • Direct action.
    • Sabotage. Another method is sabotage, such as track and signal systems of the railway. Also, damage to overhead lines by hook claws have been a result of this kind of protest. After an engine driver was slightly injured, the method has been labelled as a "severe interference in the rail transport"[citation needed].
    • Violent demonstrations. In 1986, West German police were confronted by demonstrators armed with slingshots, crowbars and Molotov cocktails at the site of a nuclear reprocessing plant in Wackersdorf.[27]

The results of one study that investigated the relative prevalence of each kind of protests in the anti-nuclear movement in Germany are shown below.

Profile of German anti-nuclear protests from 1988 through 1993.[28]
Type of protest Entire German
Environmental Movement		 Anti-nuclear Movement
Appeal 16.1 7.2
Procedural 8.9 7.7
Demonstrative 42.3 44.5
Confrontational 16.9 24.6
Light violence 5.7 2.4
Heavy violence 6.2 10.9
Other 3.8 2.6
Total 100 100
Sample size 1,377 62

Large protests

Demonstration against nuclear tests in Lyon, France, in the 1980s.
Anti-nuclear demonstrations near Gorleben, Lower Saxony, Germany, 8 May 1996.
See also: Anti-nuclear movement in France, Anti-nuclear movement in Germany, and Anti-nuclear movement in the United Kingdom

The largest anti-nuclear protest was most likely a 1983 nuclear weapons protest in West Berlin which had about 600,000 participants.[29] The largest petition was against nuclear weapons and boasted 32 million signatures.[30] The largest protest against nuclear power may have been on July 13, 1976 in Bilbao, Spain when 200,000 have been estimated to be in attendance; its platform was to have public votes on nuclear plants.[31]

In May 1986, following the Chernobyl disaster, an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 people marched in Rome to protest against the Italian nuclear program, and 50,000 marched in Milan.[32] Also in 1986, hundreds of people walked from Los Angeles to Washington DC in what is referred to as the Great Peace March for Global Nuclear Disarmament. The march took nine months to traverse 3,700 miles (6,000 km), advancing approximately fifteen miles per day.[33]

In the UK, on 1 April 1983, about 70,000 people linked arms to form a human chain between three nuclear weapons centres in Berkshire. The anti-nuclear demonstration stretched for 14 miles along the Kennet Valley.[34]

In 1981, Germany's largest anti-nuclear power demonstration took place to protest against the construction of the Brokdorf Nuclear Power Plant on the North Sea coast west of Hamburg. Some 100,000 people came face to face with 10,000 police officers. Twenty-one policemen were injured by demonstrators armed with gasoline bombs, sticks, stones and high-powered slingshots.[35][36][37]

In 1971, 15,000 people demonstrated against French plans to locate the first light-water reactor power plant in Bugey. This was the first of a series of mass protests organized at nearly every planned nuclear site in France until the massive demonstration at the Superphénix breeder reactor in Creys-Malvillein in 1977 culminated in violence.[38]

Protests in the United States

Anti-nuclear protest at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in 1979, following the Three Mile Island Accident.
See also: List of anti-nuclear protests in the United States and Anti-nuclear movement in the United States

The American public were concerned about the release of radioactive gas from the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and many mass demonstrations took place across the country in the following months. The largest one was held in New York City in September 1979 and involved two hundred thousand people; speeches were given by Jane Fonda and Ralph Nader.[39][40][41]

Other notable anti-nuclear protests in the United States have included:

Anti-nuclear protests preceded the shutdown of the Shoreham, Yankee Rowe, Millstone I, Rancho Seco, Maine Yankee, and about a dozen other nuclear power plants.[54]

Other events

A few injuries during protests have occurred which include a train worker who was hurt when a hook claw sabotage method was used once. No deaths have resulted from violent action, although one resulted from non-violent direct action, and one resulted from an attack by right wingers on a protest. Major instances include:

  • Also in 1990 two pylons holding high voltage power lines connecting the French and Italian grid were blown up by Italian eco-terrorists, and the attack is believed to have been directly in opposition against the Superphénix.[55]
  • In 2004, a 23 year old activist who had tied himself to train tracks in front of a shipment of reprocessed nuclear waste was run over and effectively cut in two by the wheels of the train. The event happened in Avricourt, France and the fuel (totaling 12 containers) was from a German plant, on its way to be reprocessed.[56]
  • On July 21, 2007, a Russian antinuclear activist was killed in a protest outside a future Uranium enrichment site. The victim was sleeping in a peace camp, which was part of the protest when it was attacked by unidentified raiders who beat activists who were sleeping, injuring eight and killing one. The protest group was self identified as anarchist and the assailants were suspected to be right wing.[57]

In popular culture

Beginning in the 1960s, anti-nuclear ideas received coverage in the popular media with novels such as Fail-Safe and feature films such as Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, The China Syndrome, and Silkwood.

Musicians United for Safe Energy (MUSE) was a musical group founded in 1979 by Jackson Browne, Graham Nash, Bonnie Raitt, and John Hall of Orleans, following the Three Mile Island nuclear accident. The group organized a series of five No Nukes concerts held at Madison Square Garden in New York City in September 1979. On September 23, 1979, almost 200,000 people attended a large anti-nuclear rally staged by MUSE on the then-empty north end of the Battery Park City landfill in New York.[58] The album No Nukes, and a film, also titled No Nukes, were both released in 1980 to document the performances.

In 2007, Bonnie Raitt, Graham Nash, and Jackson Browne, as part of the No Nukes group, recorded a music video of the Buffalo Springfield song "For What It's Worth".[59][60]

Recent developments

A scene from the 2007 Stop EPR (European Pressurised Reactor) protest in Toulouse, France.
Anti-nuclear protest near nuclear waste disposal centre at Gorleben in Northern Germany, on 8 November 2008.
Anti-nuclear march from London to Geneva, 2008
Start of anti-nuclear march from Geneva to Brussels, 2009

For many years after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster nuclear power was off the policy agenda in most countries, and the anti-nuclear power movement seemed to have won its case.[61][62] Some anti-nuclear groups disbanded.[62] More recently, however, following intense public relations activities by the nuclear industry, and concerns about climate change, nuclear power issues have come back into energy policy discussions in some countries.[61] Anti-nuclear activity has increased correspondingly.

In January 2004, up to 15,000 anti-nuclear protesters marched in Paris against a new generation of nuclear reactors, the European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPWR).[63]

On March 17, 2007 simultaneous protests, organised by Sortir du nucléaire, were staged in five French towns to protest construction of EPR plants; Rennes, Lyon, Toulouse, Lille, and Strasbourg.[64][65]

During a weekend in October 2008, some 15,000 people disrupted the transport of radioactive nuclear waste from France to a dump in Germany. This was one of the largest such protests in many years and, according to Der Spiegel, it signals a revival of the anti-nuclear movement in Germany.[66][67][68] In 2009, the coalition of green parties in the European parliament, who are unanimous in their anti-nuclear position, increased their presence in the parliament from 5.5% to 7.1% (52 seats).[69]

In October 2008 in the United Kingdom, more than 30 people were arrested during one of the largest anti-nuclear protests at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston for 10 years. The demonstration marked the start of the UN World Disarmament Week and involved about 400 people.[70]

In 2008 and 2009, there have been protests about, and criticism of, several new nuclear reactor proposals in the United States.[71][72][73][74][75]

A convoy of 350 farm tractors and 50,000 protesters took part in an anti-nuclear rally in Berlin on September 5, 2009. The marchers demanded that Germany close all nuclear plants by 2020 and close the Gorleben radioactive dump.[76][77]

Impact

Impact on policy

One of a set of two billboards in Davis, California advertising its nuclear-free policy
The second billboard corresponding to the one above
See also: Nuclear energy policy, Nuclear free zone, and Anti-nuclear movement in Australia

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 attention.[78] 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."[78]

For many years after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster nuclear power was off the policy agenda in most countries. More recently, intense public relations activities by the nuclear industry, increasing evidence of climate change and failures to address it, have brought nuclear power issues back to the forefront of policy discussion in the nuclear renaissance countries.[61] But some countries are not prepared to expand nuclear power and are still divesting themselves of their nuclear legacy.[61]

Under the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987, all territorial sea and land of New Zealand is declared a nuclear free zone. Nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed ships are prohibited from entering the country's territorial waters. Dumping of foreign radioactive waste and development of nuclear weapons in the country is outlawed.[79] Despite common misconception, this act does not make nuclear power plants illegal.[80]

In Italy the use of nuclear power was barred by a referendum in 1987.[81] Recently, however, Italy has agreed to export nuclear technology[82] and now intends to restart its civil nuclear power program.[83]

Touted as a victory by the Alliance '90/The Greens political party, which positions itself as anti-nuclear, Germany set a date of 2020 for the permanent shutdown of the last nuclear power plant in the Nuclear Exit Law, although recently there have been significant discussions to extend this date or repeal the law.[83][84]

Ireland also has no plans to change its non-nuclear stance and pursue nuclear power in the future.[85]

In the United States, the Navajo Nation forbids uranium mining and processing in its land.[86]

As of 2010, Australia has no nuclear power stations and the current Rudd Labor government is opposed to nuclear power for Australia.[87]

Impact on public perception of nuclear power

2007 opinion survey in Spain regarding energy sources. Nuclear obtained a low rating (3.1 on a scale of 10)[88]
Feb 2005 opinion poll regarding nuclear power in the USA.
  Respondents opposed to nuclear, many of whom would consider themselves "anti-nuclear"
  undecided
  In favour of nuclear power

Approval ratings of nuclear energy, which are a reflection of the anti-nuclear movement's position prevalence in the general public, vary from poll to poll. These variations can be due to news coverage of events concerning e.g. nuclear reactors, energy supplies, global warming. Some polls show that the approval of nuclear power rises with the education level of the respondents[89].

The results of the polls tend to be variable, depending on the question asked: a CBS News/New York Times poll in 2007 showed that a majority of Americans would not like to have a nuclear plant built in their community, although an increasing percentage would like to see more nuclear power.[90]

A poll in the European Union for Feb-Mar 2005 showed 37% in favour of nuclear energy and 55% opposed, leaving 8% undecided.[91] The same agency ran another poll in Oct-Nov 2006 that showed 14% favoured building new nuclear plants, 34% favoured maintaining the same number, and 39% favoured reducing the number of operating plants, leaving 13% undecided.[89]

In the United States, the Nuclear Energy Institute has run polls since the 1980s which had shown a general trend toward favourable attitudes on nuclear energy.[92] A poll in conducted March 30 to April 1, 2007 chose solar as the most likely largest source for electricity in the US in 15 years (27% of those polled) followed by nuclear, 24% and coal, 14%. Those who were favourable of nuclear being used dropped to 63% from a historic high of 70% in 2005 and 68% in September, 2006.[93]

In Spain in 2007, nuclear energy received a low approval rating at 3.1 on a scale of 10. Solar and wind received the highest rating, at 8.6 and 8.3, respectively.[88]

Criticism of the anti-nuclear movement

Some environmentalists criticise the anti-nuclear movement for under-stating the environmental costs of fossil fuels and non-nuclear alternatives, and overstating the environmental costs of nuclear energy.[94][95]

Of the numerous nuclear experts who have offered their expertise in addressing controversies, Bernard Cohen, Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Pittsburgh, is likely the most frequently cited. In his extensive writings he examines the safety issues in detail. He is best known for comparing nuclear safety to the relative safety of a wide range of other phenomena.[96][97]

Anti-nuclear activists are sometimes accused of representing the risks of nuclear power in an unfair way. The War Against the Atom (Basic Books, 1982) Samuel MacCracken of Boston University argued that in 1982, 50,000 deaths per year could be attributed directly to non-nuclear power plants, if fuel production and transportation, as well as pollution, were taken into account. He argued that if non-nuclear plants were judged by the same standards as nuclear ones, each US non-nuclear power plant could be held responsible for about 100 deaths per year. [98]

The Nuclear Energy Institute[99] (NEI) is the main lobby group for companies doing nuclear work in the USA, while most countries that employ nuclear energy have a national industry group. The World Nuclear Association is the only global trade body. In seeking to counteract the arguments of nuclear opponents, it points to independent studies that quantify the costs and benefits of nuclear energy and compares them to the costs and benefits of alternatives. NEI sponsors studies of its own, but it also references studies performed for the World Health Organisation[100], for the International Energy Agency [101], and by university researchers[102].

Criticism arising from concerns over global warming

Some environmentalists, including former opponents of nuclear energy, criticise the movement on the basis of the claim that nuclear energy is necessary for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. These individuals include James Lovelock,[94] originator of the Gaia hypothesis, Patrick Moore[95], and Stewart Brand, creator of the Whole Earth Catalog.[103][104] Lovelock goes further to refute claims about the danger of nuclear energy and its waste products.[105] In a January, 2008 interview, Moore said that "It wasn't until after I'd left Greenpeace and the climate change issue started coming to the forefront that I started rethinking energy policy in general and realised that I had been incorrect in my analysis of nuclear as being some kind of evil plot." [2]

Some anti-nuclear organisations have acknowledged that their positions are subject to review.[106] However, concern for global warming has not changed the views of some other anti-nuclear organisations toward nuclear energy. These include Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth (FoE). Nuclear opponents counter that capital resources would be spent more productively on renewable energy sources than nuclear plants, arguing further that the problem of intermittancy can be overcome through storage, biofuels, and improving the electrical-distribution grid.

But critics of the movement point to independent studies that show the opposite: that the capital resources required for renewable energy sources are higher.[101] They also point out that storage and long-distance redistribution of electricity, assuming they could be accomplished, would add to the cost and that the inefficiencies of both mitigation methods would raise the costs even more. They also argue that biofuels can't even replace a major part of petroleum-based fuel for vehicles, much less generate electricity.[107] Some have gone so far as to claim that incorporating renewable technologies such as wind may increase fuel consumption and carbon emissions, in places such as Denmark.[108]

See also

Template:EnergyPortal

References

  1. ^ Jerry Brown and Rinaldo Brutoco (1997). Profiles in Power: The Anti-nuclear Movement and the Dawn of the Solar Age, pp. 191-192.
  2. ^ a b c Paula Garb. Review of Critical Masses, Journal of Political Ecology, Vol 6, 1999.
  3. ^ Thomas Raymond Wellock (1998). Critical Masses: Opposition to Nuclear Power in California, 1958-1978, The University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 27-28.
  4. ^ Weart, Spencer R. Nuclear Fear: a History of Images. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988
  5. ^ Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security p. 110.
  6. ^ Social Protest and Policy Change: Ecology, Antinuclear, and Peace Movements
  7. ^ Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen (2008). Nuclear power – the energy balance
  8. ^ 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
  9. ^ Clyde W. Burleson. Nuclear Afternoon
  10. ^ Stephanie Cooke (2009). In Mortal Hands: A Cautionary History of the Nuclear Age, Black Inc., p. 280.
  11. ^ http://members.greenpeace.org/action/start/87/ Greenpeace Website
  12. ^ http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/pnucpwr.asp NRDC Website
  13. ^ http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/energybill/articles.cfm?ID=9997 Public Citizen Website
  14. ^ a b Al Gore (2009). Our Choice, Bloomsbury, pp. 165-166.
  15. ^ Motevalli, Golnar (Jan 22, 2008). ""Nuclear power rebirth revives waste debate"". Reuters. Retrieved 2008-05-15.
  16. ^ ""A Nuclear Power Renaissance?"". Scientific American. April 28, 2008. Retrieved 2008-05-15. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  17. ^ von Hippel, Frank N. (April 2008). "Nuclear Fuel Recycling: More Trouble Than It's Worth". Scientific American. Retrieved 2008-05-15. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  18. ^ Is the Nuclear Renaissance Fizzling?
  19. ^ "Nuclear fusion reactor project in France: an expensive and senseless nuclear stupidity". Greenpeace International. 2005-06-28. Retrieved 2009-12-16.
  20. ^ Energy revolution: A sustainable world energy outlook
  21. ^ International Energy Agency (2007). Renewables in global energy supply: An IEA facts sheet (PDF) OECD, 34 pages.
  22. ^ Lester R. Brown. Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, Earth Policy Institute, 2009, p. 135.
  23. ^ http://www.energyblueprint.info/fileadmin/media/documents/national/usa_report.pdf
  24. ^ International Energy Agency. IEA urges governments to adopt effective policies based on key design principles to accelerate the exploitation of the large potential for renewable energy 29 September 2008.
  25. ^ WISE has badges and stickers in 35 languages. WISE.
  26. ^ [1]
  27. ^ Energy and Now, the Political Fallout, TIME, June 2 1986
  28. ^ Dieter Rucht. University of Essex. The Profile of Recent Environmental Protest in Germany.
  29. ^ Blogs for Bush: The White House Of The Blogosphere: Edwards Calls Israel a Threat
  30. ^ ZNet |Activism | The Power of Protest
  31. ^ Friends Of The Earth
  32. ^ Marco Giugni (2004). Social protest and policy change p. 55.
  33. ^ Hundreds of Marchers Hit Washington in Finale of Nationwaide Peace March Gainsville Sun, November 16, 1986.
  34. ^ Paul Brown, Shyama Perera and Martin Wainwright. Protest by CND stretches 14 miles The Guardian, 2 April 1983.
  35. ^ West Germans Clash at Site of A-Plant New York Times, March 1, 1981 p. 17.
  36. ^ Nuclear Power in Germany: A Chronology
  37. ^ Violence Mars West German Protest New York Times, March 1, 1981 p. 17
  38. ^ Nelkin, Dorothy and Michael Pollak (1982). The Atom Besieged: Antinuclear Movements in France and Germany, ASIN: B0011LXE0A, p. 3.
  39. ^ Interest Group Politics In America p. 149.
  40. ^ a b Social Protest and Policy Change p. 45.
  41. ^ Herman, Robin (September 24, 1979). "Nearly 200,000 Rally to Protest Nuclear Energy". New York Times. p. B1. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  42. ^ Michael Kenney. Tracking the protest movements that had roots in New England The Boston Globe, December 30, 2009.
  43. ^ a b c d Williams, Eesha. Wikipedia distorts nuclear history Rutland Herald, May 1, 2008.
  44. ^ Social Protest and Policy Change p. 44.
  45. ^ a b Amplifying Public Opinion: The Policy Impact of the U.S. Environmental Movement p. 7.
  46. ^ Nonviolent Social Movements p. 295.
  47. ^ Headline: Rocky Flats Nuclear Plant / Protest
  48. ^ Anti-Nuclear Demonstrations
  49. ^ Shoreham Action Is One of Largest Held Worldwide; 15,000 Protest L.I. Atom Plant; 600 Seized 600 Arrested on L.I. as 15,000 Protest at Nuclear Plant Nuclear Supporter on Hand Governor Stresses Safety Thousands Protest Worldwide New York Times, June 4, 1979.
  50. ^ Gottlieb, Robert (2005). Forcing the Spring: The Transformation of the American Environmental Movement, Revised Edition, Island Press, USA, p. 240.
  51. ^ Discourse analysis by Brian Paltridge p. 188.
  52. ^ Pictures: New York MayDay anti-nuke/war march
  53. ^ Anti-Nuke Protests in New York
  54. ^ Williams, Estha. Nuke Fight Nears Decisive Moment Valley Advocate, August 28, 2008.
  55. ^ WISE Paris. The threat of nuclear terrorism:from analysis to precautionary measures. 10 December 2001.
  56. ^ Indymedia UK. Activist Killed in Anti-nuke Protest.
  57. ^ Energy Daily. Russian Anti-Nuclear Activist Killed In Attack. July 21, 2007.
  58. ^ Herman, Robin (September 24, 1979). "Nearly 200,000 Rally to Protest Nuclear Energy". New York Times. p. B1. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  59. ^ “For What It’s Worth,” No Nukes Reunite After Thirty Years
  60. ^ Musicians Act to Stop New Atomic Reactors
  61. ^ a b c d Research and Markets: International Perspectives on Energy Policy and the Role of Nuclear Power Reuters, May 6, 2009.
  62. ^ a b Roy McLeod (1995). "Resistance to Nuclear Technology: Optimists, Opportunists and Opposition in Australian Nuclear History" in Martin Bauer (ed) Resistance to New Technology, Cambridge University Press, pp. 175-177.
  63. ^ Thousands march in Paris anti-nuclear protest ABC News, January 18, 2004.
  64. ^ "French protests over EPR". Nuclear Engineering International. 2007-04-03. Retrieved 2007-04-10. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  65. ^ "France hit by anti-nuclear protests". Evening Echo. 2007-04-03. Retrieved 2007-04-10. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  66. ^ The Renaissance of the Anti-Nuclear Movement
  67. ^ Nuclear Waste Reaches German Storage Site Amid Fierce Protests
  68. ^ Police break up German nuclear protest
  69. ^ Green boost in European elections may trigger nuclear fight, Nature, 9 June 2009.
  70. ^ More than 30 arrests at Aldermaston anti-nuclear protest The Guardian, 28 October 2008.
  71. ^ Protest against nuclear reactor Chicago Tribune, October 16, 2008.
  72. ^ Southeast Climate Convergence occupies nuclear facility Indymedia UK, August 8, 2008.
  73. ^ Critics assail nuclear plan
  74. ^ Anti-Nuclear Renaissance: A Powerful but Partial and Tentative Victory Over Atomic Energy
  75. ^ Hearing today involves opponents to new reactors at Comanche Peak
  76. ^ Eric Kirschbaum. Anti-nuclear rally enlivens German campaign Reuters, September 5, 2009.
  77. ^ 50,000 join anti-nuclear power march in Berlin The Local, September 5, 2009.
  78. ^ a b Walker, J. Samuel (2004). Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 10-11.
  79. ^ New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act
  80. ^ "Nuclear Energy Prospects in New Zealand". World Nuclear Association. 2009-04. Retrieved 2009-12-09. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  81. ^ Italy
  82. ^ Italy joins GNEP
  83. ^ a b The Radioactive Energy Plan
  84. ^ German Parties Set to Clash Over Nuclear Power
  85. ^ Electricity Regulation Act, 1999
  86. ^ Navajo Nation outlaws uranium mining
  87. ^ Support for N-power falls The Australian, 30 December 2006. Retrieved 15 October 2009.
  88. ^ a b Study FBBVA on Social Attitudes (Spanish)
  89. ^ a b http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_271_en.pdf
  90. ^ Energy
  91. ^ EurActiv.com - Majority of Europeans oppose nuclear power | EU - European Information on EU Priorities & Opinion
  92. ^ Going Nuclear: Frames and Public Opinion about Atomic Energy
  93. ^ Survey Reveals Gap in Public’s Awareness
  94. ^ a b James Lovelock: Nuclear power is the only green solution
  95. ^ a b Going Nuclear
  96. ^ Bernard Cohen
  97. ^ The Nuclear Energy Option
  98. ^ Samuel MacCracken, The War Against the Atom, 1982, Basic Books, pp. 60-61
  99. ^ Nuclear Energy Institute website
  100. ^ Fourth Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health: Budapest, Hungary, 23–25 June 2004
  101. ^ a b Executive Summary
  102. ^ Ari Rabl and Mona. Dreicer, Health and Environmental Impacts of Energy Systems. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, vol.18(2/3/4), 113-150 (2002)
  103. ^ Environmental Heresies
  104. ^ An Early Environmentalist, Embracing New ‘Heresies’
  105. ^ James Lovelock
  106. ^ Some rethinking nuke opposition USA Today
  107. ^ Green Dreams
  108. ^ Spiked Online. Energy: the answer is not blowing in the wind.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Protests against nuclear energy.

Bibliography

  • Lawrence S. Wittner The Struggle Against the Bomb Stanford, CA: Stanford University 3 vol. ed I 1993 II 1997 III 2003
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-nuclear_movement&oldid=337085114"