Protesters Shut Down Washington Citibank Branch with Anti-Coal Message

Bringing to a dramatic close the successful POWERSHIFT 2007 conference in Washington, D.C., hundreds of youth and community members converged on a downtown branch of the financial giant Citibank yesterday. In a unique "direct action," they dumped a half-ton of coal on the doorsteps of Citibank.

A delegation of coal-field residents and students went inside to denounce Citibank’s investments to their customers and employees. Out in the street, hundreds of youth began coughing violently, with a massive “die-in” surrounding the bank that shut down them down for the rest of the day.

Looks like it won't be the last.

Comments

Stewart Peterson said…

And right next to it is an anti-nuclear poll.

I don't think I'd want to celebrate these people's victories in place of an independent capability to do the same things.

November 7, 2007 at 12:17 AM

Eric McErlain said…

This comment has been removed by the author.

November 7, 2007 at 6:34 AM

Eric McErlain said…

I'm not celebrating anything. What I am doing is passing along information that I think is relevant to our audience.

November 7, 2007 at 6:36 AM

Anonymous said…

One item I find interesting is that they are no longer giving coal the free pass they did when I was in college.

Now they must do the numbers and see the real problem with trying to simultaneously eliminate carbon and nuclear. Renewables and efficiency may help, but they will not provide the entire solution.

But, of course, I am "preaching to the choir" on this...

November 7, 2007 at 12:40 PM

Don Thieme said…

Thanks for the plug! I actually knew about this because some of my students went up to the Power Shift rally. None of my students were among the "dead," though.

November 15, 2007 at 8:09 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...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog