ALL OUT TO NYC!
September 21, People’s Climate March in NYC
Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition is marching with No Nukes contingent alongside NIRS (Nuclear Information & Resource Services), Beyond Nuclear, and more! Join us! Look for the life-size King Cong Dethroned!
More info: http://www.nirs.org/climatemarch/climatemarchhome.htm
Climate March: http://peoplesclimate.org/nonuclearpower/
RSVP & share on Facebook
REASONS WHY WE MARCH AGAINST NUCLEAR: NUKES CANNOT SAVE CLIMATE CRISIS.
REASON #1: TOO MANY REACTORS, NOT ENOUGH CARBON REDUCTIONS
Major studies (from MIT, Commission on Energy Policy, and International Atomic Energy Agency, for example) agree that about 1,500-2,000 large new atomic reactors would have to be built worldwide for nuclear power to make any meaningful dent in greenhouse emissions (fewer than 400 reactors now operate globally). If all of these reactors were used to replace coal plants, carbon emissions would drop by only about 20% worldwide. If used as new capacity instead of sustainable technologies like wind power, solar power, energy efficiency, carbon emissions actually would increase. (Click HERE to download REASON #1 in PDF)
REASON #2: NUCLEAR POWER COSTS TOO MUCH
Construction of the 1,500 new reactors (200-300 in U.S. alone) needed for nuclear power to have a significant impact on carbon reductions would cost trillions of dollars. New reactors cost some $7 billion to $15 billion each. Use of resources of this magnitude would make it impossible to also implement more effective means of addressing global warming. Energy efficiency improvements, for example, are some seven times more effective at reducing greenhouse gases, per dollar spent, than nuclear power. (Click HERE to download REASON #2 in PDF)
REASON #3: NUCLEAR POWER WOULD TAKE TOO MUCH TIME
Construction of the 1,500 new reactors needed to make a meaningful dent in carbon emissions would mean opening a new reactor about once every two weeks, beginningtoday, for the next 60 years—an impossible schedule and much too late to achieve necessary carbon reductions. The world’s nuclear reactor manufacturers currently are capable of building less than half that amount. Addressing the climate crisis cannot wait for nuclear power. (Click HERE to download REASON #3 in PDF)
REASON # 4: NEW REACTOR DESIGNS: TOO SLOW, NO DEMAND
Some otherwise knowledgeable climate scientists advocate using new, supposedly safer, reactor designs as a climate solution. These untested designs, such as the IFR (Integral Fast Reactor), PBMR (Pebble Bed Modular Reactor), thorium reactors and others, including “small modular reactors,” won’t help either. The designs—all of which have been discussed for decades—exist only on paper and it would take decades more to bring them to commercial operation. To achieve even that would require utilities to want to build them, but none do. Their costs would be even higher than current reactor designs—one reason utilities aren’t interested. Safety-wise, the designs are unproven and would require extensive and time-consuming testing before the federal NRC could license them. Waiting for such reactors to materialize would forestall much faster and cheaper climate solutions. (Click HERE to download REASON #4 in PDF)
Join us on September 21, NYC! Stay Tuned for details. [Facebook Event Page]