Fukushima: Don't Forget

End the nuclear age

Greenpeace has always fought - and will continue to fight - vigorously against nuclear power because it is an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity. The only solution is to halt the expansion of all nuclear power, and for the shutdown of existing plants.

Nastya, from Belarus was only three years old when she was diagnosed with cancer of the uterus and lungs. According to local doctors the region has seen a huge increase in childhood cancer cases since the Chernobyl disaster.

We need an energy system that can fight climate change, based on renewable energy and energy efficiency. Nuclear power already delivers less energy globally than renewable energy, and the share will continue to decrease in the coming years.

Despite what the nuclear industry tells us, building enough nuclear power stations to make a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would cost trillions of dollars, create tens of thousands of tons of lethal high-level radioactive waste, contribute to further proliferation of nuclear weapons materials, and result in a Chernobyl-scale accident once every decade. Perhaps most significantly, it will squander the resources necessary to implement meaningful climate change solutions.  (Briefing: Climate change - Nuclear not the answer.)

The Nuclear Age began in July 1945 when the US tested their first nuclear bomb near Alamogordo, New Mexico. A few years later, in 1953, President Eisenhower launched his "Atoms for Peace" Programme at the UN amid a wave of unbridled atomic optimism.

But as we know there is nothing "peaceful" about all things nuclear. More than half a century after Eisenhower's speech the planet is left with the legacy of nuclear waste. This legacy is beginning to be recognised for what it truly is.

Things are moving slowly in the right direction. In November 2000 the world recognised nuclear power as a dirty, dangerous and unnecessary technology by refusing to give it greenhouse gas credits during the UN Climate Change talks in The Hague. Nuclear power was dealt a further blow when a UN Sustainable Development Conference refused to label nuclear a sustainable technology in April 2001.

The risks from nuclear energy are real, inherent and long-lasting.

The latest updates

 

TEPCO senior management still out of touch with their victims

Blog entry by Hisayo Takada | 27 June, 2014 1 comment

It has often been pointed out that TEPCO has been badly managed for years and that it caused the triple meltdown of its reactors at Fukushima Daiichi. So, I attended the 90 th Annual General Meeting of TEPCO to see if management has...

A Brief History of Europe's Energy Troubles

Feature story | 25 June, 2014 at 11:00

The Ukraine crisis currently shows just how dependent Europe is, especially on Russian oil and gas. The EU spent a total of EUR 421 billion on energy imports in 2012.

When it comes to nuclear power, small isn't beautiful. Or safe or cheap.

Blog entry by Justin McKeating | 19 June, 2014 7 comments

Not beautiful, safe or cheap: a message to the United States, where the Obama administration has pledged to waste money financing the Small Modular Reactor (SMR). SMRs are supposed to be small and prefab – constructed from parts...

Europe’s ageing nuclear reactors must have an environmental assessment

Blog entry by Jan Haverkamp | 6 June, 2014 3 comments

World Environment Day today was important for European nuclear energy policy, and the triggering issue was in Ukraine. No, it was not because of the G7 meeting talking about the consequences of energy dependence in the shadow of the...

Poland's nuclear energy programme stumbles again: Has PGE lost control of its...

Blog entry by Jan Haverkamp | 22 May, 2014 9 comments

In late February, during one of our regular strolls through the Lubiatowo dunes where the Polish government and the utility PGE are planning to build 3,000 MW of nuclear capacity, we found something peculiar. Bright orange sticks –...

1 - 5 of 959 results.

Categories
Tags