Alliance for Nuclear Accountability

by

Governor’s Hearing On New Nuclear Waste Brings Opposition From SC Activists

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Conservation Voters of South Carolina, South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, the South Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club, and the League of Women Voters of South Carolina all delivered testimony against the the shipment of hot nuclear waste for “reprocessing” at the Savannah River Site (SRS).

The hearing before the Governor’s Nuclear Advisory Council in Columbia, SC was prompted by backroom  “negotiations” about terms for bringing spent fuel to the DOE’s Savannah River Site.  Speaking to The State, the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability’s Tom Clements called for the secret talks to end:

The alliance’s Tom Clements said behind-the-scenes discussions now are occurring among state leaders to

Cleaning up the Cold War legacy: Speak out against plutonium in your own backyard

DOWNLOAD THIS FLYER: “Cleaning up the Cold War legacy:
Speak out against plutonium in your own backyard”. Alliance for Nuclear Accountability.

allow the disposal in exchange for some type of jobs initiative. He did not name anyone, but said “it’s time for those in on these discussions to reveal what they are up to” and tell the public.

A spokesperson for Governor Nikki Haley supports “processing” of spent fuel at the Savannah River Site.  That’s a thinly disguised term for reprocessing. 

Yucca Mountain in Nevada was once considered as a permanent storage site for all US nuclear waste, but the proposal was killed on scientific and political grounds.  Since the successful scuppering of the Yucca proposal,  politicians and the nuclear industry discuss “temporary” storage of nuclear waste at SRS.  But since there is no facility for permanently storing nuclear waste, storage in South Carolina would likely become permanent.  

The State article today continues:

Environmentalists said storing spent nuclear fuel could increase the cry for a reprocessing plant. Reprocessing is supposed to render used fuel available for reuse in commercial plants, but conservationists say it creates more waste and threatens the landscape.

“Our country stands at a nuclear waste crossroads,” the conservation league’s Ryan Black said. “The political failure to develop Yucca Mountain has only complicated this issue further. But Yucca’s demise should not dictate that South Carolina bear the burden, yet again, of our nation’s radioactive waste.”

Many thanks to Tom Clements for helping inform, organize, and publicize the resistance the public about the secret nuclear waste proposals.

Read the full article at The State here.

by

Spent Fuel Reprocessing Efforts Dealt Set-back by NRC – Tom Clements writes for Aiken Leader

The Aiken Leader has published a piece by Tom Clements on the difficulties in opening a facility for reprocessing nuclear waste at the Savannah River Site.  As Clements points out in the article, the proposal would result in the movement of large amounts of nuclear waste into South Carolina, with no future plans for removing the waste, even after it has been reprocessed.

Clements has written previously on this issue for the Leader, and pointed out the complicity of South Carolina lawmakers in dangerous and wasteful plan to bring nuclear waste into the state.  His previous article, “Documents Reveal Time-line and Plans for “Small Modular Reactors” (SMRs) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) Unrealistic and Promise no Funding“, was published on June 19.

An important Department of Energy (DOE) hearing on disposal of weapons-grade plutonium is coming up on September 4 (5:30-8:00 p.m.) at the North Augusta Municipal Center, 100 Georgia Avenue, North Augusta, SC 29841.  This hearing looks at production of plutonium fuel (MOX) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) and MOX use in nuclear reactors operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).

Here is a link to a fact sheet on the issue from the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability:

http://www.ananuclear.org/Portals/0/MOX%20hearing%20fact%20sheet%208.31.2012%20pdf%20FINAL.pdf

Tom notes that even if you can’t make the hearing on September 4, you can submit written comments.  Just go to the DOE webpage and find the contact information there.  Written comments are accepted through September 25, 2012.

Tom Clements was the South Carolina Green Party nominee for U.S. Senate in 2010.  He received 121,474 votes and 9.22% of the total running against Tea-Party Republican Jim DeMint and Democrat Alvin Greene.

Read Tom’s article below.

Continue reading →

by

Confronting Nuclear Apologists: Tom Clements vs Lindsey Graham

2010 SC Green Party candidate for Senate Tom Clements confronted pro-nuclear Senator Graham at a press conference on Saturday. Graham has taken more than $40,000 in campaign contributions from the nuclear industry.

Clements is Southeast Nuclear Policy Coordinator for Friends of the Earth.  He and the organization do excellent work in South Carolina’s environmental movement.  Graham was touring Duke Power’s Oconee Nuclear Station in support of plans to build 6 new nuclear reactors in and around South Carolina.

The Oconee nuclear plant has serious safety issues, which were discussed in a recent report from the Union of Concerned Scientists.  Friends of the Earth and Clements want to keep these safety issues in the public eye.

On his campaign’s Facebook page, Clements described the interaction as follows:

…on Tuesday, I faced off against a panicked Senator Lindsey Graham who was touting for the nuclear industry at the Oconee nuclear plant – at a “secret” news conference in the visitor center. I couldn’t resist crashing it. I showed FEC reports about how much Lindsey got from the nuclear industry in 2009-2010 – about $45,000, more than 1/3 of his PAC donations. Like DeMint, we’ve got another South Carolina snake amongst us, who is exploiting government to benefit special interests.

The State quotes Graham responding to Clements:

The senator faced criticism Tuesday from anti-nuclear activist Tom Clements, who disputed that all of the problems were resolved. Clements also said the press event was little more than an attempt to advance an industry on which Graham relies for campaign funds.

Clements gave reporters data showing that Graham has received in the past two years about $40,000 in campaign contributions from those sympathetic to the nuclear industry, such as major power companies. Clements, who is with Friends of the Earth, raised those questions during a press briefing after the tour.

“The reason people in the nuclear power industry support me is because I believe in what they do,” Graham told Clements. “I don’t get any money from your organization because I disagree with you.”

The nuclear industry is scrambling to fill the pages of The State with enough public relations twaddle to cover up the radioactive disaster in Japan.   Graham is a long-time advocate for nuclear power, as is his colleague in the Senate, Jim DeMint.

Both Senators from South Carolina favor reprocessing nuclear waste at the Savannah River Site.  Reprocessing will mean storing spent nuclear rods in SC.   The exposure of the spent rods in spent fuel pools at the Fukushima plant in Japan are a part of the ongoing disaster there.

In addition to the used fuel stored on site at reactors in and around the state, hundreds of thousands of gallons of irradiated liquid waste and sludge are stored at the Savannah River Site.  Graham and DeMint have proposed bringing nuclear waste to SRS from around the country for reprocessing.   Without a permanent waste storage facility, that reprocessed waste will likely stay in SC.

Graham is correct that the nuclear industry supports him because of his support for nuclear power.   It is also accurate to say that the tens of thousands of dollars he’s received from the nuclear industry interest have swamped the tens and twenties from nuclear power opponents.  When political donations determine the discourse, then only the interests of the rich and powerful are heard.

Further Reading: