Skip to main content

Celebrity Sighting near Oyster Creek (Wait, isn't he supposed to be in France?)

By Lisa Stiles
NA-YGN member April Schilpp alerted me to a “Clinic Symposium on Campaign to Close Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant” at Rutgers University next Friday, December 8. And it will be hosted by actor Alec Baldwin—maybe he came back after discovering that nearly 80% of France’s electricity is generated by nuclear power plants?

Anyway, the agenda is:

1)Richard Webster, Attorney, Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic and Eastern Environmental Law Center: Safety issues

2) Bob Alvarez, Senior Policy Advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Energy 1993-1999: Spent fuel dangers and general vulnerability

3) Julia Huff: Attorney, Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic and Executive Director, Eastern Environmental Law Center: Environmental issues associated with Oyster Creek operations: marine impacts

4) Joe Mangano, Executive Director, Radiation and Public Health Project: Health issues

5) Paul Gunter, Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) – Exelon’s pattern of deception and incompetence

6) Questions – timing variable

7) Alec Baldwin, What You Can Do

Local NA-YGN members are planning to attend and give out material telling the other side of the story. If you want to support the effort, send an email to supportOysterCreek-at-hotmail.com.

I’ll post more information as I receive it!

Comments

Kelly L. Taylor said…
Oh, Lisa, give our friends at Oyster Creek some insights into the modes of operation of the members of the board. Here are some insights into Managano's claims, writings, and tactics:

http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2005/08/mangano-nation-reactors-racism.html

http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2005/08/joseph-mangano-and-art-of-deception.html

http://www.inblogs.net/neinuclearnotes/2006/11/tooth-fairy-cons-connecticut.html

http://blog.niof.org/2005/09/anti-nuclear-quote-of-day_30.html

and the winner of them all - read what Mangano has to say about Oyster Creek.

http://www.radiation.org/press/oystercreekmar06.html

I suppose you really ought to review the details of the study... but there's no copy of the study linked to the press release?
December 4, 2006 at 1:11 PM
Kelly L. Taylor said…
Maybe this is the study, or part of it, in support of comment to the NRC regarding Turkey Point.

http://radiation.org/spotlight/nrc_comments2.html

Check to ensure the counties within 30 miles of a nuclear station really are what is assumed. Check to make sure counties within the 30 mile radius aren't omitted when they dilute the negative conclusions of the report.

Here is the CDC website where mortality rates can be compared for yourself, by county:

http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html
December 4, 2006 at 2:02 PM
Stewart Peterson said…
Why should it be done by county at all? That's not a representative sample.
December 5, 2006 at 6:10 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

By
Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…
Post a Comment
Read more

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

By
If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…
Post a Comment
Read more

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

By
The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…
Post a Comment
Read more