Sierra Club Sues Pentagon Over Wind Farms

From AFP:

The Sierra Club filed a federal lawsuit in San Francisco charging the US Department of Defense (DOD) with blocking the construction of wind power plants.

The environmental group accused the Pentagon of essentially creating a nationwide moratorium on new wind farms by barring their construction within the line of sight of military radar.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the DOD failed to complete a congressionally-mandated study to determine whether windmills actually interfered with radar, the suit maintained.

"While the Defense Department drags its feet studying if wind farms are a threat to national security, Americans are missing out on cleaner, cheaper energy," said Sierra Club attorney Kristin Henry.

"If the military can have windmills and effective radar at Guantanamo, why can't we have both in the Midwest?"

For more on this story, take a look at SEJ's Tip Sheet. And for more on those wind turbines at Guantanamo, click here.

Technorati tags: Energy, Electricity, Environment, Wind Power, Radar, Pentagon, Sierra Club

Comments

David Bradish said…

If the Sierra Club sues the DOD for hindering new wind farms, is it game for the nuclear industry to sue Sierra Club or other environmental groups who try to hinder new nukes?

June 29, 2006 at 2:10 PM

FuturePundit said…

The DOD is dragging its feet abot wind power on behalf Teddy Kennedy and other powerful Senators and Reps. They are the ones who stick the stuff in appropriations bills that make the DOD the obstacle.

June 30, 2006 at 6:42 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog