Who’s Who in Green: Dr. Rosalie Bertell, Anti-Nuclear Nun

Mathematician, nuclear science researcher, nun in the order of the Grey Nuns of the Sacred Heart, human rights activist and author Dr. Rosalie Bertell knows a thing or two about uranium, and how it effects the human body. Dr. Bertell has devoted her life to speaking out on behalf of those most vulnerable and affected by radiation – women and children, aboriginals and workers in uranium mines and nuclear facilities.

Bertell is an activist of protecting the health of the planet through peace, writing in her book Planet Earth: The Newest Weapon of War,

“It is my belief that we have been treating the symptoms but not the cause of the disease of the Earth. We have been abusing Earth’s natural systems, the way it regulates temperature and water supply, recycles waste and protects life. For me, some of the most fundamental abuses have occurred because of our continued reliance on the military.”

Dr. Bertell is especially vocal about the consequences of the 1984 Union Carbide explosion in Bhopal, India and the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear reactor meltdown. Both disasters killed and sickened hundreds of thousands of people and still have an effect today on people who live near the accident sites.

The dual Canadian and U.S. citizen knew from childhood that she would become a nun, but her interest and abilities in the field of science were also clear from an early age. She took a research job at Roswell Park Cancer Institute, the world’s first cancer research facility, and it was then that she became interested in radiation and nuclear-related subjects.

Bertell told interviewer Wendy Jewell,

“I was a senior cancer research scientist studying the harm done to a large population by unnecessary uses of diagnostic medical X-ray. I became outraged when I found that nuclear power plants were releasing radioactive materials (like X-rays) at this same level routinely, indiscriminately exposing the unsuspecting public. My first experience was a nuclear plant, which wanted to locate its facility next to the Gerber’s Baby Food Farm in Barker, NY. That plant was never built.”

After suffering a heart attack in 1972, Dr. Bertell spent much of her recovery time in a monastery studying the effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings and emerged as the field’s top expert. She quit her job at the Roswell Institute, which accepted research money from the nuclear industry, after they put pressure on her to keep quiet.

Dr. Bertell is an outspoken critic of the use of depleted uranium in warfare, which has extremely destructive effects on the planet and human health.

Rosalie Bertell has written several books and was among 1,000 women peace activists from around the world nominated as a group for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005. She has also received numerous awards including the Alternative Nobel Prize, the Right Livelihood Award and the World Federalist Peace Award.

Dr. Rosalie Bertell’s Green Score: 79,995

Nuclear Industry Moves to Hijack Obama’s Climate Bill

Republicans in Congress have teamed up with the nuclear industry to create an alternative climate change bill that would double the number of nuclear reactors in the US by 2030. However, saying it’s a ‘climate change’ bill is a bit of an exaggeration: climate change is only mentioned in it one time. The spoiler bill is all about getting the nuclear industry a giant piece of the green economy pie.

From The Guardian:

“If you care about climate change … 100 new nuclear power plants is the place to start,” said Lamar Alexander, a Republican from Tennessee who is the strongest proponent of nuclear power in the Senate.

Another crucial element of the Republicans’ “nuclear renaissance” are two rival proposals for a “clean energy bank” now before Congress. One version, under consideration by the Senate, envisages almost unlimited federal loan guarantees to encourage wind and solar power and, nuclear proponents hope, new reactors.

Ellen Vancko, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said: “The nuclear industry would like to be able to finance the next generation of nuclear reactors using the faith and credit of the US taxpayer to underwrite the expansion. They don’t want to be responsible for any risk of financing these plants and neither do their lenders.”

The cost of each new nuclear plant ranges between $5 billion and $12 billion dollars – no chump change, especially compared to other sources of renewable energy. Another problem is the fact that there’s still no place to permanently store nuclear waste.

Republicans just. Don’t. Get. It.

Link [The Guardian]
Photo credit: Flickr user christian.senger

McCain Wants 45 New Nuclear Reactors by 2030

Once again, Republican presidential nominee John McCain is proving that his ideas about ‘saving the environment’ don’t mesh with the majority of environmentalists’ views. McCain is advocating nuclear power in a big way – he plans to set the nation on course to build 45 new nuclear reactors by the year 2030.

From Reuters:

“If I am elected president, I will set this nation on a course to building 45 new reactors by the year 2030, with the ultimate goal of 100 new plants to power the homes and factories and cities of America,” he said.

There are 104 operating nuclear reactors nationwide at present, which generate about 20 percent of the nation’s power supply.

McCain has argued forcefully for further nuclear plants, seeing them as part of a solution to fighting climate change and establishing U.S. energy independence.

Obama, on the other hand, taking a more realistic stance. Last week, his campaign said that they see nuclear power as an important part of setting the U.S. on a path toward clean energy, but that the issue of disposing of nuclear waste and solving nuclear proliferation concerns are also crucial. On June 20th, Obama said that nuclear power was worth careful consideration but that it was not a panacea.

Link [Reuters]
Photo credit: Flickr user Christopher Peterson

Tornado Hits University’s Nuclear Reactor in Kansas

This could have gone really, really badly. A tornado hit a nuclear research reactor on the Kansas State University campus last week. Though the tornado flattened other buildings on the campus, including the Wind Erosion Laboratory, the reactor was untouched. Luckily, someone had the forethought to shut the thing down properly earlier in the day.

From Reuters:

The tornado caused extensive damage to the building, but no damage to the reactor, which had been shut down properly earlier in the day, the university said.

The reactor is located in Manhattan in Riley County, about 120 miles west of Kansas City, Missouri.

Because of the event, the university declared an alert, which is the second lowest of the NRC’s four emergency classifications.

There are more than 30 operating research and test reactors in the United States, according to the NRC’s website.

Link [Reuters]
Photo credit: Flickr user Chimothy27

Green Meme Killers: Nukes Are Good For You

There’s been a lot of discussion lately about the viability of nuclear power; the loudest and most obnoxious voice in the chorus has been Wired magazine, who took it upon themselves to launch a bright orange cover telling us wacky enviro types that we should start gunning down spotted owls, guzzling pesticides, and give nuclear power a big hug.

Totally safe. For real. We promise this time. From Stuckincustoms.

The reason behind all this lunacy? Carbon Dioxide. Wired thinks that it’s the Holy Grail of the environmental movement, and the only concern that any of us should have for the next 75 years or so. Environmentalism, the magazine trumpets, is too important to be left to the environmentalists. Because we care too much about spotted owls to actually save the world.

Look at the environmental protection agency’s CO₂-per-kilowatt-hour map of the US and two bright patches of low-carbon happiness jump out. One is the hydro-powered Pacific Northwest. The other is Vermont, where a 30-year-old nuclear reactor, Vermont Yankee, keeps the Ben & Jerry’s cold.

Vermont! (Pub: I wonder what Simon Slade would say) How interesting that you bring that up, since it you assail it elsewhere in your arrogant little shot across the bow of the green community. But that’s merely a pet peeve. Let’s look further into that low-carbon happiness; the Pacific Northwest does draw power largely from hydro-plants, but once upon a time, it was on the nuclear bandwagon, as well. Actually, the Hanford Site, in Washington State, led the way for nuclear power in America: it was established in 1943 as part of the Manhattan Project, and has nine plutonium production reactors. What’s going on there? “Cocooning,” a process where the reactor is entombed in a case of steel, concrete, and lead, designed to be water, fire, tornado, and earthquake resistant for 75 years. Because maybe by then we’ll know what to do with the stuff inside. They don’t know what to do with it in Vermont, either: the Yankee’s storage pools are almost full, and still waiting for a federal repository to open somewhere. Because you know, Nuclear power is great in my state, but the leftovers need to go to somebody else’s. Of course, they may just be able to seal it off as well: a 2007 reactor SCRAM, the last safety option before a meltdown, has placed the operating license of the Vermont plant at risk. [Read more]

Patrick Moore of Greenpeace Falls to Dark Side; World Collectively Yawns

Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore has defected, advocating for something he once fought against, and our response is: who cares?

Moore, who once stringently opposed underground nuclear testing, is now supporting the use of nuclear power. He believes that building hundreds of nuclear power plants is the only viable alternative to coal-fire electricity generation, stating that wind, solar, hydroelectric, geothermal and other renewable energy sources simply don’t have enough potential.

Moore now represents the Clean Air and Safe Energy Coalition, a nuclear-backed energy group, and has also taken on several causes that don’t jive with Greenpeace values, such as old-growth logging. He claims that a background in science has caused him to see things differently.

From Idaho Statesman:

“We don’t believe we have been making too much electricity,” he said. “We believe we’ve been making energy with the wrong technologies.”

His critics, like Andrea Shipley, executive director of the Snake River Alliance, say he has simply sold out.

“The only reason Patrick Moore is backing something as unsafe and risky as nuclear power is he is being paid by the nuclear industry to do so,” Shipley said.

There are those who will try to turn this into a big to-do about the reality of climate change, but the fact is, his credibility has gone down the drain, and one more person cheerleading dumb causes like nuclear energy won’t amount to much. Patrick Moore becoming a Sith Lord isn’t going to put a dent in the cause.

Link [IdahoStatesman]

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons