Victory for Anti-Nuclear Power Movement in the US
Score two for the movement against nuclear power in this country.
In June, the federal appeals court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was in violation of the law for failing to adequately assess the environmental hazards involved in the storage of nuclear waste, a point that anti-nuke activists have been making for years and years.
Score two for the movement against nuclear power in this country.

In June, the federal appeals court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was in violation of the law for failing to adequately assess the environmental hazards involved in the storage of nuclear waste, a point that anti-nuke activists have been making for years and years.
In response to that court ruling, the NRC this week issued a statement that it was stopping the issuing of permits for new nuclear power construction, as well as for life extensions on old existing plants, until it satisfies the court's concerns.
The NRC's decision puts the breaks on new construction permits for 16 reactors, and renewal permits for 14 more.
That's a welcome move.
Still, it's not a permanent solution because the NRC is likely to go back to the court sometime in the not too distant future to try to convince the judges that its waste storage plans are somehow adequate.
Good luck with that!
Because the truth of the matter is that there is no safe way to store nuclear waste, either in the short term or in the long term--and by the long term, I mean the really long term: It takes 100,000 years before this stuff stops being hazardous.
Here's hoping that federal judges keep seeing the folly and falsity in all of this.
Meantime, let's celebrate a victory for the anti-nuke movement.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Score two for the movement against nuclear power in this country.

In June, the federal appeals court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was in violation of the law for failing to adequately assess the environmental hazards involved in the storage of nuclear waste, a point that anti-nuke activists have been making for years and years.
In response to that court ruling, the NRC this week issued a statement that it was stopping the issuing of permits for new nuclear power construction, as well as for life extensions on old existing plants, until it satisfies the court's concerns.
The NRC's decision puts the breaks on new construction permits for 16 reactors, and renewal permits for 14 more.
That's a welcome move.
Still, it's not a permanent solution because the NRC is likely to go back to the court sometime in the not too distant future to try to convince the judges that its waste storage plans are somehow adequate.
Good luck with that!
Because the truth of the matter is that there is no safe way to store nuclear waste, either in the short term or in the long term--and by the long term, I mean the really long term: It takes 100,000 years before this stuff stops being hazardous.
Here's hoping that federal judges keep seeing the folly and falsity in all of this.
Meantime, let's celebrate a victory for the anti-nuke movement.
Score two for the movement against nuclear power in this country.

In June, the federal appeals court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was in violation of the law for failing to adequately assess the environmental hazards involved in the storage of nuclear waste, a point that anti-nuke activists have been making for years and years.
In response to that court ruling, the NRC this week issued a statement that it was stopping the issuing of permits for new nuclear power construction, as well as for life extensions on old existing plants, until it satisfies the court's concerns.
The NRC's decision puts the breaks on new construction permits for 16 reactors, and renewal permits for 14 more.
That's a welcome move.
Still, it's not a permanent solution because the NRC is likely to go back to the court sometime in the not too distant future to try to convince the judges that its waste storage plans are somehow adequate.
Good luck with that!
Because the truth of the matter is that there is no safe way to store nuclear waste, either in the short term or in the long term--and by the long term, I mean the really long term: It takes 100,000 years before this stuff stops being hazardous.
Here's hoping that federal judges keep seeing the folly and falsity in all of this.
Meantime, let's celebrate a victory for the anti-nuke movement.

