UN predicts bleak outcome without drastic action on climate

A new report released on Tuesday by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) offers a bleak outlook for the future if the world continues in its failure to make drastic cuts in carbon emissions.

The UNEP Emissions Gap Report 2019, says that global greenhouse gas emissions must now be reduced by 7.6% every year for the next ten years, starting in 2020, a goal the world has come nowhere close to achieving to date. Despite the Paris Climate Accord, global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to rise, on average by 1.5% a year. Because of our procrastination, such goals become harder and less achievable the longer we fail to act. “Every year of delay beyond 2020 brings a need for faster cuts, which become increasingly expensive, unlikely and impractical,” said the UNEP report.

The actions of the Trump administration have reversed a trend in the US that saw a decline in CO2 emissions until last year when they rose by 2.7%. The Trump adminstration has announced it will withdraw the US from the Paris accord in 2020.

Meanwhile, the nuclear power industry continues to impede progress in renewable energy deployment by grabbing state and federal subsidies and trying to reframe itself as "renewable" energy. In a recent article in Forbes magazine, Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute, delivered a detailed analysis showing how the slowness and expense of nuclear power impedes renewable energy development. "Costly options save less carbon per dollar than cheaper options," Lovins wrote. "Slow options save less carbon per year than faster options. Thus even a low- or no-carbon option that is too costly or too slow will reduce and retard achievable climate protection." And, Lovins adds, average nuclear operations, "now cost more than new modern renewables, with or without their temporary subsidies."

Beyond Nuclear is working to keep nuclear power out of the Green New Deal or any energy blueprint designed to address the climate crisis. Please help us with a donation for this work! We have, as UNEP says, no time to lose. Donate here and thank you!

The Pope calls for nuclear weapons abolition, sounds caution on nuclear power

Pope Francis, speaking at Nagasaki, Japan, made a powerful speech condemning nuclear weapons, including their possession for the purpose of so-called deterrence. Here is the full text of the speech. The pope then also spoke with survivors of the 2011 triple disaster -- earthquake/tsunami/nuclear meltdown.

Of the pope's remarks on nuclear power, the Japan Times reported:

The pope did not directly call for the abolition of nuclear power plants, but he did note that Japanese bishops have called for the “immediate abolition” of such plants since the triple meltdowns in Fukushima. 

“Our age is tempted to make technological progress the measure of human progress,” he said. “So it is important to pause and reflect on who we are … and who we want to be.

“Important decisions will have to be made about the use of natural resources, and future energy sources in particular,” he stressed.

On nuclear weapons, Pope Francis most pointedly said: "The arms race wastes precious resources that could be better used to benefit the integral development of peoples and to protect the natural environment. In a world where millions of children and families live in inhumane conditions, the money that is squandered and the fortunes made through the manufacture, upgrading, maintenance and sale of ever more destructive weapons, are an affront crying out to heaven."  And:

"Convinced as I am that a world without nuclear weapons is possible and necessary, I ask political leaders not to forget that these weapons cannot protect us from current threats to national and international security. We need to ponder the catastrophic impact of their deployment, especially from a humanitarian and environmental standpoint, and reject heightening a climate of fear, mistrust and hostility fomented by nuclear doctrines. The current state of our planet requires a serious reflection on how its resources can be employed in light of the complex and difficult implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in order to achieve the goal of an integrated human development."

Nuke Farm, New Mexico (Part One), by Nick Maxwell at We the Fourth

Excellent summary of the Holtec International/Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance consolidated interim storage facility fight, by Nick Maxwell, as posted at We the Fourth.

Hot particles in Japan: meaning for the Olympics and beyond

Many hundreds of thousands of people -- athletes and spectators -- will flood into Japan for the 2020 Olympics. But exposure dangers from the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe have not ended since the meltdowns and explosions spread radioactive material over large areas reaching down to Tokyo and beyond. Soon after the start of the meltdowns, experts began warning of exposure to radioactive microparticles (hot particles) -- a type of particle that poses a danger unaccounted for by regulatory agencies. What are the implications for people coming to the Olympics, and for those who have been there and will remain, once the games have concluded? More

U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee passes H.R. 2699 by voice vote

H.R. 2699, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2019, was passed by the U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee on Wed., Nov. 20, by voice vote. That is, there is no roll call record as to how each U.S. Representative voted. Voice votes are usually applied only to non-controversial matters, such as naming a post office.

This dangerously bad high-level radioactive waste legislation should be among the most controversial bills Congress addresses. H.R. 2699 aims to open one or more dumps in the Southwest -- so-called consolidated interim storage facilities (CISFs), targeted at New Mexico and/or Texas, as well as a permanent burial dump at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, on Western Shoshone Indian land. If any one of these dumps open, large-scale shipments of high-risk irradiated nuclear fuel, by road, rail, and/or waterway, would travel through most states, past the homes of millions of Americans.

Considering their targeting for the nuke waste dumps, this bill could be called the Screw Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas bill. (The 1987 amendments to the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which singled out Nevada for the country's nuke waste dump, was most commonly dubbed the Screw Nevada bill.) But when it comes to the high-risk transportation impacts, we all live in Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas! More, including what you can do.