Ten reasons to be antinuclear.

1.- La energía Nuclear es muy peligrosa. La tragedia de Chernobil, dejo bien a las claras las posibilidades destructivas que puede acarrear esta fuente de energía.

2.- La nuclear es la energía mas sucia. Los residuos producidos por la energía nuclear duran miles de años y su gestión, tratamiento y desaparición aun están sin solución.

3.- La energia nuclear es la que crea menos puestos de trabajo. Los puesto de trabajo por unidades energéticas, están por debajo de las creadas por las energías renovables, según el informe 2008 de Comisiones Obreras de España.

4.- La nuclear es una energía muy cara. Las ayudas gubernamentales (que pagamos todos...) que necesita para llevar a cabo su mantenimiento son desorbitadas, por poner una cifra sobre el coste de los residuos radioactivos según La Empresa de Residuos Radioactivos de España (ENRESA) son superiores a los 13.000 millones de Euros hasta el 2070.

5.- La energía nuclear no es necesaria. Siempre que haya voluntad política, como sucede en Alemania o Suecia, es posible ir reduciendo su implantación, y cumplir la reducción de emisiones de CO2 como dice el Protocolo de Kyoto.

6.- La energía nuclear no es la solución al cambio climático. Al estar fuera de los mecanismos financieros, del Protocolo de Kyoto, no puede ser económicamente viable , menos como agente de la reducción de emisiones de CO2 y su eficiencia como reductor del Cambio Climático queda en entredicho. 

7.- La energía nuclear no crea independencia energética. Ante la carencia de uranio, España debe de importar el 100% , con lo que la dependencia de otros países persiste, como con los combustibles fósiles.

8.- La energía nuclear también es finita. La reservas del Uranio -235- (el que usan los reactores atómicos) se calcula que duraran unas décadas solamente.

9.- La energía nuclear tiene un rechazo social elevado. En las encuestas realizadas en España, la mayoría de la ciudadanía rechaza la energía nuclear.

10.- La energía nuclear no es compatible con las energías sostenibles. No reúne ninguno de los requisitos de sostenibilidad: No es eficiente desde el punto de vista económico, no tiene una viabilidad social, y no es bueno para el medioambiente.

https://colabora2.greenpeace.es/yosoyantinuclear/decalogo.php

-------------------------------------------------

Nuclear power is always unsafe: Greenpeace

The impact of any meltdown in Japanese nuclear reactors will be small, a nuclear power expert says.

Kelly Macnamara, AAP March 14, 2011, 10:19 am

Environmentalists say the possibly catastrophic failure of a Japanese nuclear reactor shows that nuclear power can never be safe. 

Two reactors at the Fukushima plant in north-eastern Japan have been damaged by the devastating earthquake which struck nearby on Friday, and at least one is in danger of meltdown. 

Radiation has been released into the air after an explosion at one reactor, and although authorities have said it is not intense enough to affect human health, they have ordered evacuations of people living within 20km. 

"This proves once and for all that nuclear power cannot ever be safe," Greenpeace campaigns head Steve Campbell said on Monday. 

"Japan's nuclear plants were built with the latest technology, specifically to withstand natural disasters, yet we still face potential meltdown," he said in a statement. 

Greenpeace was also concerned about the lack of information about the total amount of radiation already released, and whether the ponds for spent radioactive fuel - outside the containment area of the reactor - were secure. 

"We request that Japan's government share this information with the public immediately," he said. 

Anti-nuclear campaigner Helen Caldicott said the release of radioactive caesium 137 and iodine 131 into the atmosphere from the Fukushima plant posed grave health risks. 

If a meltdown occurred, 200 other isotopes would be released, she said in a statement. 

"All of these substances can cause cancer and genetic diseases either in the near or long term," said Ms Caldicott, who is president of the Foundation for a Nuclear Free Planet. 

Earthquakes were not unknown in Australia, she said. 

"Are we mad enough to introduce this disastrous form of energy into our lives?"  http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/-/world/9003374/nuclear-power-is-always-unsafe-greenpeace/

------------------------------------------------

10 Reasons to Say 'No' to Nuclear Power in Australia

por CamWalker - Última modificación 01/09/2007 20:13

1. CATASTROPHIC EVENTS

In addition to the risk of accidents, nuclear power reactors are vulnerable to disasters from sabotage, terrorism, or the use of conventional forces to attack nuclear facilities during war.

More info:

* Chapter 5 in 'Nuclear Power: No Solution to Climate Change',

<www.foe.org.au/campaigns/anti-nuclear/issues>.

* EnergyScience Briefing Paper #10: <www.energyscience.org.au>.

2. NUCLEAR WASTE

The 2006 government-commissioned Switkowski report envisages the construction of 25 power reactors, which would produce up to 45,000 tonnes of high-level nuclear waste. There is not a single permanent repository for spent fuel or high-level nuclear waste anywhere in the world.

More info: EnergyScience Briefing Paper #8: <www.energyscience.org.au>.

3. NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Nuclear power is the one and only energy source with a direct and repeatedly-demonstrated connection to the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. As former Prime Minister Paul Keating said last year, any country with a nuclear power program "ipso facto ends up with a nuclear weapons capability".

More info: EnergyScience Briefing Papers #9,11 and 17: <www.energyscience.org.au>.

4. REDUCED PROPERTY PRICES. COMPULSORY LAND ACQUISITION. NO INSURANCE.

A nuclear power plant would reduce local property values. The government may use compulsory land acquisition powers to seize land for reactors - just as it has previously seized land for a nuclear waste dump. Insurance companies do not insure against the risk of nuclear accidents.

5. COST

Too cheap to meter, or too expensive to matter? The nuclear power industry survives only because of huge taxpayer subsidies.

More info: EnergyScience Briefing Paper #1: <www.energyscience.org.au>.

6. DEMOCRACTIC RIGHTS

The federal government has sought legal advice on its powers to override state laws banning nuclear power plants. The government already has a track record of imposing unwanted nuclear facilities on states/territories and communities. For example, the federal government ignored Northern Territory legislation which prohibits the imposition of a nuclear waste dump. Instead, the government rail-roaded legislation through federal parliament in December 2005 to by-pass normal decision-making processes and to undermine environmental, public safety and Aboriginal heritage protections. Further draconian legislation was rail-roaded through the parliament in late 2006. The 2006 Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Legislation Amendment Act states that a nuclear dump site nomination is legally valid even without consultation with and consent from Traditional Owners. It also removes the right to appeal under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 and it removals rights to "procedural fairness".

7. WATER

Nuclear power is the most water-intensive of all the energy sources. Reactors typically consume 35-65 million litres of water per day.

More info: Impacts of Nuclear Power & Uranium Mining on Water Resources,

<www.foe.org.au/campaigns/anti-nuclear/issues>.

8. TOO SLOW

It would probably take 15 years or more to develop nuclear power in Australia. Clean energy solutions can be deployed immediately.

9. GREENHOUSE GASES

Nuclear power emits three times more greenhouse gases than wind power according to the 2006 Switkowski report. Nuclear power is also far more greenhouse intensive than energy efficiency measures.

More info: EnergyScience Briefing Papers #2 and 3: <www.energyscience.org.au>.

10. UNNECESSARY

We don't need nuclear power. A clean energy future is viable and affordable. Several renewable energy sources - such as bioenergy, geothermanl hot rocks, solar thermal electricity with storage, and sometimes hydroelecticity - can provide reliable baseload electricity.

More info:

* Clean Energy Future Group - national & state studies: <wwf.org.au/ourwork/climatechange/cleanenergyfuture>.

* Clean Energy literature references: <www.foe.org.au/campaigns/anti-nuclear/issues>.

* EnergyScience Briefing Papers #5 and 16: <www.energyscience.org.au>.

10 Reasons to Say 'No' to Nuclear Power in Australia — Friends of ... 1 Sep 2007 ... 10 Reasons to Say 'No' to Nuclear Power in Australia ... <www.foe.org.au/campaigns/anti-nuclear/issues>. * EnergyScience Briefing Paper #10: ...

www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/.../10-reasons-to-say-no-to-nuclear-power-in-australia - En caché - Similares

----------