The courage to make change

Shortly before he died, our board chair, Lou Friedman, sent along a card with a secular adaptation of the famous Niebuhr quote: "Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." In light of the election results for President, Senate and House, we have had to give that message a lot of thought at Beyond Nuclear as it pertains to our mission. Acceptance is never the easy part, but what can we change? Nuclear energy is fading financially. That means it will pitch for huge subsidies. We will work to stop that. Even without a change of administration, efforts are underway to dump radioactive waste at targeted "temporary" sites. We will continue our efforts to block that, along with plans to transport highly radioactive liquid waste from Ontario to South Carolina. Old reactors are as dangerous today as they were yesterday. We will redouble our efforts to close them. We've written to many of you with our winter appeal. In that letter, you will find more details about our plans. Thank you as always for your support. We need it now more than ever to keep up the good fight! More

National bailout of U.S. atomic reactors based on NY approach would cost $280 billion by 2030

"Burning money" image, by Gene Case of Avenging Angels, was featured on The Nation's 2003 cover regarding the "Nuclear Power Relapse"Tim Judson, executive director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), has published a report entitled "Too Big to Bail Out: The Economic Costs of a National Nuclear Power Subsidy." Judson was joined on a press conference by former Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner Peter Bradford (listen to the recording here). Their analysis made clear that: nuclear power is not a viable climate strategy; more than half of U.S. reactors are expected to be uneconomical by 2020; and that this huge infusion of public funding for old nuclear plants would crowd out renewables. Meanwhile, in New York, the StopTheCuomoTax.org -- No Nuclear Bailout campaign has, most recently, issued an action alert, flown airplane banners, and erected billboards, to protest against the State of NY's agreement to pay $35 million of public money, if the transfer (from Entergy to Exelon) of the age-degraded, economically failing FitzPatrick reactor in upstate NY on the Lake Ontario shore is not finalized for certain reasons -- but state officials won't divulge what those reasons are (as reported by Syracuse.com). The campaign is now calling for New Yorkers to come to Albany on Thurs., Nov. 17th, to speak out at the Public Service Commission. More

Motion for Summary Judgement filed against Beyond Nuclear's legal challenge to unprecedented highly radioactive liquid waste shipments

In the case of BEYOND NUCLEAR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [DOE], et al., Defendants, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed, on behalf of DOE, a DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.

DOJ and DOE are trying to get the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA to dismiss the lawsuit brought by Beyond Nuclear and six other environmental groups.

Terry Lodge of Toledo, OH serves as legal counsel for the environmental coalition.

The coalition's rebuttal to the Nov. 4, 2016 DOJ/DOE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT is due Nov. 22nd.

Florida "ratepayers have subsidized Duke & FPL almost $2B for nuclear power plants that will never be built"

As reported by Tampa Bay Times columnist John Romano, in a column entitled "Did I mention that Amendment 1 is a no-good, dirty scam?". Thanks to Scott Stapf of the Hastings Group for Tweeting it out.

NIRS: NATIONAL BAILOUT OF U.S. NUCLEAR REACTORS BASED ON NEW YORK APPROACH WOULD COST $280 BILLION BY 2030

Not A Viable Climate Strategy: With More Than Half of US Reactors Expected to Be Uneconomical by 2020, $160 Billion Would Still Be Required for “Narrower” Subsidy Program; Huge Infusion of Support Would Crowd Out Renewables.

WASHINGTON, D.C.///November 3, 2016///Nuclear power started out in the United States with the promise it would be “too cheap to meter,” but may end up being “too big to bail out.”  A new report by the nonprofit Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) finds that a national bailout of nuclear energy patterned on the model advanced this year in New York State would cost ratepayers and taxpayers more than $280 billion by 2030.  Based on an independent analysis that over half of existing nuclear power in the U.S. will be unprofitable by 2020, a narrower bailout would still cost the U.S. $160 billion by 2030.  In addition to enormous expense, NIRS found that one major side-effect of bailing out nuclear power on a large-scale basis would be the starving of renewable energy of needed capital.

Available online at http://bit.ly/too-big-to-bail-out-nuclear, the “Too Big to Bail Out: The Economic Costs of a National Nuclear Power Subsidy” report notes that since 2014 nuclear power companies have lobbied aggressively for new subsidies to benefit existing nuclear power stations in the U.S. So far, such proposals have only been adopted in one state (New York), and legal and regulatory challenges have resulted today in only one nuclear reactor receiving temporary financial support to date: the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in New York. A long-term, statewide subsidy policy recently adopted in New York, to be implemented beginning in April 2017, is now being touted as a model for other states and for national implementation. The total cost of the 12-year subsidy New York is offering to four reactors is substantial: an estimated $7.6 billion -- more than three times as much as the subsidies for new renewable energy sources ($2.44 billion by 2030) under the state’s new standard. More.