NUCLEAR AMENDMENTS TO CLIMATE BILL TO BE VOTED ON SOON

CALL YOUR SENATORS!

YOUR ACTIONS WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE!





Debate on the Senate climate change bill (now numbered S. 3036) began on Monday and has continued through Tuesday. Voting on amendments—including amendments to give billions more taxpayer dollars to the nuclear power industry—will begin as early as tomorrow, Wednesday, June 4.



Your calls to your Senators are needed now more than ever!

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121



If you already have called your Senators, call again to remind them that no nuclear amendments are acceptable, and that nuclear power has no place in the necessary effort to address the climate crisis. Renewable energy and energy efficiency are faster, cheaper, safer and cleaner ways to reduce carbon emissions and meet our electricity needs.



And ask your parents, kids, grandchildren, the guy at the gas station, the woman at the bank, the person in the next cubicle, and everyone else you know, meet and run into, to call as well. We don't have huge budgets and hundreds of lobbyists running all over Capitol Hill—we rely on people power.



Your calls ARE effective and CAN make a real difference. Call even if you think your Senators are hopeless—part of what we need to do is create a real buzz on Capitol Hill that millions of Americans believe this is an important issue.



The message to your Senators is simple: Vote against any and all nuclear amendments to the climate bill. The wealthy nuclear industry does not deserve any more taxpayer dollars. Our resources need to be spent on energy efficiency, solar and wind power, distributed energy and smart grids.



Please call now, and please send us a quick e-mail letting us know you called. As always, let us know if we can help in any way.



Thank you!



Michael Mariotte

Executive Director

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

nirsnet@nirs.org

www.nirs.org

301-270-6477

No nukes, no oil, no pollution!

:thumbsup:

The amount of pollution generated in the processing of the uranium/plutonium (nuclear fuel) isn't good either.

Our tax dollars should go for better uses than a bail-out for the Nuclear Power Industry.

There's a reason why they need these tax breaks.....check into them.

n/t

France is a much smaller nation, and it doesn't have nearly as many coal & gas plants to offset the emissions of.

On the other hand, Australia has a big beef about nuke plants.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Australian_nuclear_power_plants_rejected_by_states

The nuclear waste for 20 years of power needs of a family of four is a glass cylinder the size of a cigarette lighter.

How many tons of CO2 would the same family create over 20 years burning coal or even natgas? :shrug:

It gives precedent over alternative energy and awards the BIG corporations

Let's award the technology that can really make a difference in climate change. We don't have time to waste.

A few highlights from the bill:

* Besides the inherent problems of carbon trading, the bill gives tradeable carbon permits valued at one trillion dollars to the fossil fuel industry for free.

* The revenue from portion of carbon permits that are auction is directed straight back to back to polluters through hundreds of billions of dollars of subsidies to the coal, oil and automobile industries, and nuclear power.

* According to an aide to Senator Lieberman, the bill “would be the most historic incentive for nuclear in the history of the US“. It is estimated that throughout various incentives in the bill $500 billion could go to nuclear power.

* Carbon permits are given first - before all other auctions - to NEW coal facilities, giving incentive to new coal construction before other forms of energy.

* The bills targets are well below what the UN recommends, especially the short term goals: virtually no national reductions in emissions would occur before 2020.

Lieberman and Warner

of this bill.

I was unaware of some of the data.
So thank you for the info.

I just thought that $44 Billion was worth pointing out.

A lot of conservative organizations vocally opposed the $500 billion boondoggle when its come up in the past,
on financial and economic grounds.

We need more nuclear plants in the short term, being the next couple of decades, and then a ton more money into nuclear fusion research.

If we put enough effort into developing nuclear fusion reactors as we did the atomic bomb then we would hopefully get it done.

I have discussed the subject in a public forum with my Congressman.

My recently renominated Senator, Frank Lautenberg, is a supporter of nuclear energy, and this is wise, visionary and morally right.

On the other hand, the anti-nuke fundementalist cults couldn't care less about dangerous fossil fuel war, dangerous fossil fuel terrorism, dangerous fossil fuel waste or dangerous fossil fuel depletion, all of which, unlike their immoral and intellectually vapid arguments about nuclear energy, are actually real.

I call for a fight against ignorance and stupidity. I call for the rapid expansion of nuclear energy on a vast EMERGENCY basis.

I'm just saying that if it were such a great investment, then why doesn't the "Free Market" stipulate it's inclusion already?

Westinghouse ap1000 fits the bill.

I will bet that you have called zero times for banning dangerous fossil fuels because of the subsidy in blood and treasure.

More likely you complain about gas prices.

Nuclear energy is the world's largest, by far, form of climate change gas free energy.

It has the lowest external cost of any form of energy - and since I'm assuming that you have no idea what external costs are - I'll define what they are: They are the cost in destruction to the environment and health.

It is ignorant to oppose nuclear power.

Ignorance kills.

For the record, I favor a trillion dollar subsidy to nuclear power. It is the only exajoule scale form of climate change gas free energy that works and is scalable.