THE ECOLOGIST REPORT: NO NEW NUCLEAR DEMAND

Many thanks to The Ecologist for reporting on our push for a No New Nuclear clause in Climate Emergency plans.

No new nuclear 

Radiation Free Lakeland 

| 6th February 2020

Campaigners outside Lancaster City Council

Campaigners demand a ‘no new nuclear’ clause in climate emergency planning. 

Climate activists across the world are uniting to protect the planet from continuing fossil fuel use.  There is much talk of a green industrial revolution and a Green New Deal. This sounds good, but what does it mean? 

Kevin Frea,  co-chair of the Climate Emergency Network and deputy leader of Lancaster City Council has worked hard to sign local councils up declaring a climate emergency. He said: “This movement is being led by every political group and is involving local people in planning the actions needed to cut carbon.” 

But there’s an important thing missing here. Last September members of Radiation Free Lakeland lobbied Lancaster City Councilasking the council to include a No New Nuclear clause in their climate emergency planning.

THE FULL ARTICLE CAN BE READ HERE

PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE THE PETITION WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED TO CUMBRIA COUNTY COUNCIL THIS THURSDAY 13TH FEBRUARY IN KENDAL

One thought on “THE ECOLOGIST REPORT: NO NEW NUCLEAR DEMAND

  1. What you are doing is very important. I think those subsidies got into the US climate plan under Obama, which Trump cancelled, but could get renewed under a Democratic President. At least one person in the US Congress pushing the “Green New Deal” is invested in oil and gas, pipelines, and utilities that deal in nuclear power. He’s rich enough he could invest in renewables big-time, but probably awaiting subsidies: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2020/02/14/bernie-sanders-campaign-co-chair-green-new-deal-promoter-congressman-ro-khannas-dirty-energy-investments-are-the-wrong-kind-of-green-2/ Bernie Sanders, himself, says he is opposed to nuclear, but only against relicensing and all of the old ones have been relicensed. In the US, the SMR are getting Congressional funding, so it’s apart from the Presidency, anyway. Worse, Bernie Sanders had no qualms about sending Vermont nuclear waste to be buried in Texas. He could have spoken against it. Vermont’s neighbor – New Hampshire – deals in nuclear subs (I think the cleanup) and even they sent their waste to South Carolina. It seems to me that New Hampshire’s nuclear navy site could baby-sit the waste for perpetuity.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s