The Pandemic Could Get Worse In A Way That No One Has Been Thinking About-- A Guest Post From Harvey Wasserman

Most people who are familiar with Harvey Wasserman probably know him because of his groundbreaking work as an anti-nuke and alternative energy activist, working going all the way back to the '70s when he helped organize the big "No Nukes" concert after the Three Miles Island accident. He's also an author and journalist and we're gratified to welcome him back to right pages of DWT this evening-- even if what he's writing about below will scare the living daylights out of you!

Terrified Atomic Workers Warn That the COVID-19 Pandemic May Threaten Nuclear Reactor Disaster
by Harvey Wasserman

The COVID Pandemic has thrown America’s atomic reactor industry into lethal chaos, making a major disaster even more likely. Reports from “terrified” workers at a Pennsylvania reactor indicate vital precautions needed to protect them may not even be possible.

Nationwide, with falling demand and soaring prices for nuke-generated electricity, the Pandemic casts a dark shadow over reactor operations and whether frightened neighbors will allow them to be refueled and repaired.

America’s 96 remaining atomic reactors are run by a coveted pool of skilled technicians who manage the control rooms, conduct repairs, load/unload nuclear fuel.

Because few young students have been entering the field, the corps of about 100,000 licensed technicians has been-- like the reactors themselves-- rapidly aging while declining in numbers. Work has stopped at the last two US reactors under construction (at Vogtle, Georgia) due to the Pandemic’s impact, which includes a shrinking supply of healthy workers.

Every reactor control room requires five operators at all times. But the physical space is limited there and in plant hot spots that need frequent, often demanding repairs. Social distancing is virtually impossible.  Long shifts in confined spaces undermine operator safety and performance.

Of critical importance:  every 18-24 months each reactor must shut for refueling and repairs. Itinerant crews of 1000 to 1500 technicians travel to 58 sites in 29 states, usually staying 30-60 days. They often board with local families, or in RVs, hotels, or Air B&Bs.

Some 54 reactors have been scheduled for refuel/repairs in 2020. But there is no official, organized program to test the workers for the Coronavirus as they move around the country.

As the Pandemic thins the workforce, older operators are being called out of retirement. The Trump-run Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently certified  16-hour work days, 86-hour work weeks and up to 14 consecutive days with 12-hour shifts.

Long-time nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen warns of fatigued operators falling asleep on the job. He recalls at least one exhausted worker falling into the highly radioactive pool surrounding the high-level fuel rods.  Operator fatigue also helped cause the 1979 melt-down that destroyed Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island Unit Two.

The industry is now using the Coronavirus Pandemic to rush through a wide range of deregulation demands. Among them is a move to allow radioactive waste to be dumped into municipal landfills.

The NRC may also certify skipping vital repairs, escalating the likelihood of major breakdowns and melt-downs.  Nearly all US reactors were designed and built in the pre-digital age, more than 30 years ago. Most are in advanced decay. Atomic expert David Lochbaum, formerly with the NRC, warns that failure risks from longer work hours and deferred repairs could be extremely significant, and could vary from reactor to reactor depending on their age and condition.

The industry has also been required to maintain credible public health response plans should those reactors blow.  But Pandemic-stricken US hospitals now have zero spare capacity, multiplying the possible human fallout from an increasingly likely disaster.

Industry-wide the Pandemic has brought working conditions to the brink of collapse. At Pennsylvania’s Limerick Generating Station, workers say they are “terrified” that the plant has become a “breeding ground…a complete cesspool” for the Coronavirus. “I’m in a constant state of paranoia,” one technician told Carl Hessler, Jr., of MontcoCourtNews.

Others say social distancing is non-existent, with “no less than 100 people in the training room” and “people literally sitting on top of each other…sitting at every computer elbow to elbow.” Shift change rooms, Hessler was told, can be “standing room only.” At least two Limerick workers are confirmed to have carried the virus.  COVID rates in the county are soaring.

Nuclear engineer Gundersen warns that limited control room floorspace and cramped conditions for maintenance can make social distancing impossible. “Some component repairs can involve five workers working right next to each other,” he says.

Because reactor-driven electricity is not vital amidst this pandemic downturn, the demand for atomic workers to “stay home” is certain to escalate. “I am concerned with Exelon & Limerick Nuclear Generating Station’s handling of the scheduled refueling-- which has required bringing in workers from across the country during this pandemic,” says US Rep. Madeleine Dean in a statement likely to be repeated at reactor sites around the US.

“The potential increase of COVID-19 cases from 1,400 new workers not observing social distancing is staggering,” says epidemiologist Joseph Mangano of the Radiation and Health Project. “The Limerick plant should be shut until the COVID-19 pandemic is over.”

Indian Point Unit One, north of New York City, will shut permanently on April 28. Iowa’s Duane Arnold will close in December.

But Ground Zero may be Pacific Gas & Electric’s two 35-year-old reactors at Diablo Canyon. PG&E is bankrupt for the second time in two decades, and recently pleaded guilty to 85 felonies from the fires its faulty wires sent raging through northern California, killing 84 people. In 2010 a faulty PG&E gas line exploded in San Bruno, killing eight people.

Surrounded by earthquake faults, Diablo’s construction prompted more than 10,000 civil disobedience arrests, the most at any US reactor. PG&E now admits its two Diablo nukes will lose more than $1.2 billion this year, more than $3.44 million/day.

Amidst its bitterly contested bankruptcy, PG&E may be taken over by the state. But more than a thousand workers are slated in early October to refuel and repair Unit One, which the NRC says is dangerously embrittled.

Whether local residents concerned about both a nuclear accident and the spread of the Coronavirus will let them into the county remains to be seen.  So is whether they’ll be still operating by then.

With the future of the nuclear industry at stake-- along with the possibility of more reactor mishaps-- the whole world will be watching.


 

Will China Be the Enforcer of the Paris Climate Agreement?

Greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants

by Gaius Publius

It's amazing what can be done by a government determined to do it. In the U.S., our approach to the climate crisis is to use the "invisible hand" of the market and be careful not to get in the way of "wealth creation" (for billionaires). The Chinese don't have those constraints. Yes, they want to make their billionaires wealthier, but that's not their primary goal. There's a very nationalist strain in China, and to a greater extent, I think, than in the U.S., the Chinese government wants what's best for China, and not just its wealthy.

Put differently, the economic policy of the Chinese government is to grow the country, including its billionaires. It often seems that U.S. economic policy is to grow our billionaires at the expense of the country. That may be no more evident than in the following story.

"You Talk about Fixing the Climate, But What about China?"

One of the main reasons the climate foot-draggers, in both parties, want to go slow on climate in the U.S. (aside both parties' allegiance to "wealth creation") is the China argument. In simple form, it says, "Whatever the U.S. does to save the climate will be undone by China, so why bother?" I don't think that argument holds true any longer.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, writing in The Telegraph (my emphasis):

China is the low-carbon superpower and will be the ultimate enforcer of the COP21 climate deal in Paris

Chinese scientists have published two alarming reports in a matter of weeks. Both conclude that the Himalayan glaciers and the Tibetan permafrost are succumbing to catastrophic climate change, threatening the water systems of the Yellow River, the Yangtze and the Mekong.

The Tibetan plateau is the world’s "third pole", the biggest reservoir of fresh water outside the Arctic and Antarctica. The area is warming at twice the global pace, making it the epicentre of global climate risk.

One report was by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The other was a 900-page door-stopper from the science ministry, called the “Third National Assessment Report on Climate Change”.

The latter is the official line of the Communist Party. It states that China has already warmed by 0.9-1.5 degrees over the past century – higher than the global average - and may warm by a further five degrees by 2100, with effects that would overwhelm the coastal cities of Shanghai, Tianjin and Guangzhou. The message is that China faces a civilizational threat.

Whether or not you accept the hypothesis of man-made global warming is irrelevant. The Chinese Academy and the Politburo do accept it. So does President Xi Jinping, who spent his Cultural Revolution carting coal in the mining region of Shaanxi. This political fact is tectonic for the global fossil industry and the economics of energy.

Until last Saturday, it was an article of faith among Western climate sceptics and some in the fossil industry that China would never sign up to the COP21 accord in Paris or accept the "ratchet" of five-year reviews.

They have since fallen back to a second argument, claiming that the deal is meaningless because China will not sacrifice coal-driven growth to please the West, and without China the accord unravels since it now emits as much CO2 as the US and Europe combined.

This political judgment was perhaps plausible three or four years ago in the dying days of the Hu Jintao era. Today it is clutching at straws.

Eight of the world’s biggest solar companies are Chinese. So is the second biggest wind power group, GoldWind. China invested $90bn in renewable energy last year and is already the superpower of low-carbon industries. It installed more solar in the first quarter than currently exists in France.

The Chinese plan to build six to eight nuclear plants every year, reaching 110 by 2030. They intend to lever this into worldwide nuclear dominance, as we glimpsed from the Hinkley Point saga.

Home-grown energy is central to Xi Jinping's drive for strategic security. China's leaders know what happened to Japan under Roosevelt's energy embargo in the late 1930s, and they don't trust the sea lanes for supplies of coal and liquefied natural gas. Nor do they relish reliance on Russian gas.

Isabel Hilton from China Dialogue says the energy shift has reached a point where Beijing has a vested commercial interest in holding the world to the Paris deal. “The Chinese think they can dominate low-carbon technologies,” she said....

Do read the rest; it's fascinating.

The Chinese Century & the Next Great Power Source

There are a couple of takeaways here. One relates to the fact that, as we all know, the U.S. has been competing economically with China to make sure the 21st century won't be the Chinese Century the way the 20th century was the American Century.

So the first takeaway is this — thanks to our billionaires and their control of the U.S. political process, that competition is over. In a world without a climate crisis, China will win economically. The U.S. has already, as part of an unspoken national economic policy, handed China control of the world's manufacturing, in exchange for major additions to American CEO bottom lines, like Phil Knight's at Nike. Put simply, U.S. national economic policy is to make China and Phil Knight rich at the expense of most Americans. Both China and Phil Knight have taken that deal.

The second takeaway is an insight from Kevin Phillips' book American Theocracy, that world power ("greatness") moves to the country that adopts the next great power source. For a while, the Dutch dominated with wind power (they really did), until coal power allowed the British to take their place as the world's leading nation. The U.S. ran its economy on oil, not coal, and supplanted the British. The next great energy source is going to be renewables (if we can get to a stable world run on renewables).

The Chinese are counting on that being true, that the first nation that owns and runs on renewables is the next great national power. They want to control the world's manufacturing and control the next-generation power source. They see this as their path to the Chinese Century, and they're going to try very hard to get there. Again, from the article: “The Chinese think they can dominate low-carbon technologies”. In a world without catastrophic climate change, it's likely they're right.

But the third takeaway is this:

• If I'm right that we have at most 10 years to start a massive conversion to zero-carbon power generation in the U.S....
   
• If warming of at least +1.5 °C is "baked in" and guaranteed no matter what we do, and not stopping means we can only go higher that that...
   
• If we don't soon have a national "wake up call" that motivates us to emergency action...

... then no one will own this century, not us, not the Chinese, not anyone, because it won't be ownable. If we're lucky, civilization will survive this century more or less intact. Period. Every nation will spend its energy in adaptation, not expansion; in survival and self-preservation, not dominance. Consider, for example, that if 45°N latitude is the cutoff point for livability in the second half of a hot next century, China's breadbasket, the North China Plain, at about 39°N could be at risk. That's where China will spend its time and money. We may have similar problems.

Dismissing the "China Argument"

It's true that we can't "fix" (mitigate, in climate-speak) or avoid the worst of the climate crisis without both the U.S. and China lending a serious hand. If the Chinese are going to do their part — and it looks like they are — it does come down to us then. The Chinese are not saying, "Let's wait for the U.S. before we get serious." They're taking a leadership role and acting. Time to take a page from that book and do our own part? Looks like the "China argument" just went away.

GP

New Jersey May Be Very Democratic, But The Political Machines Make That Pretty Irrelevant

Norcross and Christie, the two grotesque crooks who run New Jersey

Earlier today we mentioned, in passing, an insurance-related dust-up in the South Jersey congressional race for the open NJ-03 swing seat being vacated by Jon Runyan. It pits multimillionaire insurance executive Tom MacArthur against Burlington County Freeholder Aimee Belgard, a Democratic. Belgard, who studied Environmental Science before getting a law degree, has been endorsed by both the progressive, grassroots Sierra Club and the more transactional, less trustworthy and more Beltway-oriented League of Conservation Voters. But this battle isn't over Belgard's desire to deal with Climate Change and MacArthur's desire to bury his head in the sand. It's about insurance-- and the insurance business is especially important in South Jersey, where political boss of bosses George Norcross, ostensibly a kind of "Democrat," makes some of his millions as chairman of Connor, Strong & Buckelew, a huge insurance brokerage which specializes in selling health plans to governmental entities.

Norcross has put talk of single-payer healthcare off the table among South Jersey politicians. Although his power is mostly among state legislators and county and officials, he has complete control of Democratic Party politics in South Jersey and pretty much has veto power of everything and anything. Senator Cory Booker, for example, is his guy. There are 4 districts in which Norcross calls the shots: NJ-01, where corrupt hack Ron Andrews is retiring and Norcross' equally corrupt brother is taking over the congressional seat; NJ-02, where Machine candidate Bill Hughes is making a pitifully weak challenge to GOP incumbent Frank LoBiondo; NJ-03, the site of the MacArthur-Belgard contest; and NJ-04, the most Republican of the 4 districts (R+7) and where the DCCC is, once again, giving Republican anti-Choice sociopath Chris Smith a free ride.

Let's go back to MacArthur for a minute before we deal with Norcross. During the primary, his lunatic fringe opponent, Steve Lonegan, attacked him for cheating hurricane victims unfortunate enough to have been insured by MacArthur's company, York Risk Services, part of AIG.

Tom MacArthur, a multi-millionaire former mayor who is battling a prominent tea party challenger for the Republican congressional nomination in a New Jersey district, ran an insurance company accused of cheating disaster victims, MailOnline can reveal.

From 2002 until late 2010, MacArthur was chairman of the board of York Risk Services Group, a unit of the global insurer American International Group. He was also the company's president and CEO from 1999 to 2009 and a major shareholder until at least 2006.

York boasts on its website that 'We re-price 500,000 medical bills per year and save clients an average of 61% on each bill.' That cost-cutting focus caught up with the company in 2008 after Hurricane Ike devastated the U.S. Gulf coast and a massive wildfire laid waste to hundreds of homes in Sylmar, California.

It ended up settling two Ike-related lawsuits and paying a sizable fine to the state of California in connection with allegations of underpaying claims from the fire's victims… York's apparent hand in determining the size of claim payouts, however, has landed it in the same legal hot water as the companies it serves, facing legal accusations along with them of unfairly slow-walking, low-balling or denying claims.

…York, along with another AIG unit, paid the state of California a $285,000 settlement following charges that they violated the state's Fair Claims Settlement Practice regulations while handling damage claims following a massive November 14, 2008 fire in the town of Sylmar.

That blaze, known in the American West as the Sayre fire, burned more than 11,000 acres of forest and destroyed 600 structures and 480 mobile homes.

It also produced hundreds of 'total loss' homeowners claims, including those covering 370 mobile home policies held by AIG's New Hampshire Insurance Company.

The California Department of Insurance claimed that the two companies had underpaid the devastated homeowners by 10.8 million.

York, led by MacArthur, was responsible for processing and evaluating those claims as part of New Hampshire Insurance's outsourcing strategy. The two companies each paid half the penalty, or $142,500, according to court documents.

Both denied wrongdoing, but agreed to a settlement in August 2012 to end California's years-long investigation into 125 separate alleged violations of the California Insurance Code.

The two suits related to Hurricane Ike, the massive 2008 storm that swept through the Gulf Coast and crippled coastal Texas, were settled with undisclosed terms.

One, filed by Houston Baptist University, alleged that York low-balled its settlement offer after the hurricane laid waste to its main administration building and student center.

…The Republican National Committee has embraced MacArthur as one of its so-called 'young guns,' suggesting a vigor and fearlessness usually associated with strong retail campaigners.

But according to the Newark Star-Ledger, a $2 million cash loan from MacArthur's personal wealth makes up nearly his entire election war chest.

It rarely matters which party wins when it comes to Norcross' business interests, which have become paramount in the state. He is extremely tight with Christie, as big a crook as he is. And beyond making sure insurance companies stay in positions where they can continue cheating the public, Norcross' latest shenanigans involve his role in bringing a new nuclear power manufacturing facility to Camden. Local politicians are not allowed to say anything against it because Norcross is on the board of Holtec International, a local corporation that makes equipment for it and-- lo and behold-- that the firm has just received the third-biggest tax break in New Jersey history in exchange for agreeing to locate its new plant in Camden, NJ instead of in South Carolina.

Since Gov. Chris Christie took office in 2010, New Jersey has distributed more than $4 billion in tax breaks-- far more than under any previous governor-- yet private-sector job growth has been one of the slowest of all 50 states, according to federal data.

New Jersey Policy Perspective, a liberal research organization, said the tax break awarded to Holtec was one of the largest ever bestowed in the United States. The state is paying $658,228 for each job-- "a sky-high number that has never been seen before in New Jersey and is even far higher than the average per-job cost of the largest 'megadeals' across the country," Jon Whiten, Policy Perspective's deputy director, said.

[Republican state Sen. Michael] Doherty said the real cost was even higher, since 160 of the jobs already existed in the state.

"It looks like New Jersey is paying over $1 million for each new job that's being created, and this is a disturbing trend," he said.

Doherty added: "My understanding is that small businesses create 98 percent of the jobs in the state of New Jersey. Let's provide tax relief for small business-- a broad-based program of tax relief-- not a bunch of insiders sitting around a table picking the winners and losers, government picking the winners and losers."

The Democratic-controlled Legislature revamped New Jersey's tax-incentive programs last year, carving out looser provisions solely for Camden and opening the door to larger subsidies in general.

"New Jersey's policymakers need to revisit last year's legislation and rein in this reckless surge in business tax subsidies," said Gordon MacInnes, president of NJPP. "Instituting a cap on the amount of tax breaks the state can approve would be a simple and common-sense place to start."

Daryn Iwicki, state director for the anti-tax group Americans for Prosperity, said subsidies are pointless unless New Jersey first tackles its high income- and property-tax rates.

"The biggest problem we have here is it's another politically connected individual getting a tax break," Iwicki said, referring to Norcross, an influential insurance executive who entered into a partnership with Singh and others to buy the Philadelphia Inquirer in 2012. The Norcross group recently sold its share of the newspaper company.

Iwicki noted there were only two larger subsidies ever awarded in New Jersey-- and that they had not panned out as expected. One of them, a $261 million subsidy spread out over 20 years, went to Revel Casino in Atlantic City, which is facing its second bankruptcy in two years. The other, valued at as much as $350 million, went to the stalled American Dream project in the Meadowlands, formerly known as Xanadu, with its own troubled financial history.

Looks like South Carolina dodged a bullet. New Jersey will regret that in time. Listen to this hustler:

Republicans Don't Want Regulations... Not Even On Nuclear Safety

Wednesday we mentioned the GOP's attempt to disable to American federal regulatory system and how the whole dysfunctional effort got bogged down in some crazy typo. Yesterday they were back again and, presumably, someone had proof-read the bill. When the House Rules Committee presented it again, only 3 Democrats went along with the GOP effort to bring it up again-- slimy corporate whores and future lobbyists Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT) and Heath Shuler (Blue Dog-NC). Two Republicans had second thoughts and crossed the aisle in the opposite direction, Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) and the most currently most vulnerable Republican in Congress, Buck McKeon (R-CA). The procedural resolution passed 235-183.

Frelinghuysen and McKeon were back on the reservation by the time Cantor called for a final vote on the bill itself. But two other ultra-vulnerable Republicans, Charlie Bass (R-NH) and Bob Dold (R-IL) switched their votes from Wednesday and now decided they didn't want to destroy the national regulatory system-- although nothing was changed in the bill except the typo.

13 anti-consumer, anti-worker. anti-family corporate whores among the Democrats crossed the aisle to vote with the GOP on this. The ones I've bolded are on the DCCC priority spend list and please be aware that if you contribute any money whatsoever to the DCCC some will be spent on these galoots:

John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA)
Dan Boren (Blue Dog/New Dem-OK)
Ben Chandler (Blue Dog-KY)
Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)
Jerry Costello (IL)
Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
Larry Kissell (Blue Dog-NC)
Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)
Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog/New Dem-NC)
Bill Owens (New Dem-NY)
Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
Nick Rahall (WV)
Mike Ross (Blue Dog-AR)

Wednesday we looked at one of the amendments scheduled to be voted on. This one, by Jerry Nadler, sought to exempt nuclear plants, since if they were to go unregulated, there could be a catastrophe of unprecedented consequences. That came up for a vote yesterday too-- and it failed 176-243. Nine Republicans realized the insanity of their party's position and scurried across the aisle to get on the record opposing Boehner and Cantor on this one. On the other hand, 16 Democratic corporate whores voted with the GOP to leave the safety of nuclear facilities to luck. Most of the 13 who voted with the GOP on the overall bill were joined by Blue Dogs Heath Shuler (NC) Tim Holden (PA), and Jason Altmire (PA) and by sleazy corporate shills Steve Israel (NY), Lipinksi, Jr (IL) and Gene Green (TX). Remember, Nadler amendment was meant to ensure that Americans who live in close proximity to nuclear reactors-- like Steve Israel's constituents-- are protected in the event of a catastrophic meltdown. "In the aftermath of the Fukushima Daiichi meltdown in Japan, it is critical to ensure the safe operation of all nuclear reactors." Here's what Nadler had to say-- on the floor of the House-- about why he singled our nuclear safety for an exemption:

"[T]he underlying bill would block any and all major efforts to protect public health, safety, the environment, and so on, until the unemployment rate falls below the arbitrary figure of six percent. This blanket and arbitrary ban on potentially critical rules only would serve to help put profits ahead of people. This bill also would put profits ahead of the environment by mandating construction projects go ahead after a certain period, regardless of the environmental impact. And, the bill would impose needless costs on the government and make protecting public health and welfare that much more difficult by putting impediments to agreeing to consent decrees and settlements.

“What all of this means is that for the most potentially dangerous industries, like nuclear power, the safety of the American public would be put at serious risk by this bill. My amendment would attempt to make this Frankenstein bill slightly less of a horror show by exempting the issue of nuclear power plant safety from these sections of the bill-– Titles I, III, and V.
 
“The dangers of nuclear power are well known. One accident-- which could be caused by the power of nature, the negligence of man, or the evil of terrorism-- could doom millions of people. Because of the almost unimaginable disaster that could happen at a nuclear power plant, regulations to prevent accidents or meltdowns in advance are critically important. The underlying bill would make it harder for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to adopt such rules or policies, thereby putting millions of lives at risk. 

“Nuclear safety is of particular concern to me and the people I represent. Millions of my constituents live near an old nuclear power plant, Indian Point. It sits near two fault lines and, according to the NRC, is the most likely nuclear power plant in the country to experience core damage due to an earthquake. Hampering the ability of the NRC to require safety measures, like preventing a meltdown in the event of an earthquake, could be devastating. My amendment would free the NRC from the burdens of this bill and allow it to help keep us safe."

As the vote was finishing on this yesterday, I just happened to be on the phone with Jim Graves, the Democrat seeking to replace Michele Bachmann in Minnesota's 6th district. We'll be hearing more from Jim next week, but since his background is from the private sector and since he's a successful entrepreneur, I did ask him how he would have voted on this bill. He said he would have opposed it because it wasn't even trying to solve any real problems, just make political points and sound bytes. By Bachmann's own definition Jim is "job creator." He doesn't just talk about small business, he's started quite a few of them himself and he has employed thousands of people throughout his congressional district and across Minnesota. But, unlike Bachmann, he knows that actual job creators are hard working middle class Americans-- and they are the one's suffering most in difficult economic times brought on by a political Establishment too concerned with Wall Street and not concerned enough with Main Street. In reality, the small business person doesn't worry as much about taxes as they do about making sure that costumers are coming in the front door and buying the products and services they sell. Like most Democrats, Jim understands that in order to revive our economy, we need to make sure that ordinary working families have money to spend on those products and services. Jim also understand the role, the value and importance collective bargaining and organized labor play in building and maintaining a vibrant middle class that can afford to purchase things. "It's an essential part of our country's heritage." He refuses to believe that unions and employers have mutually exclusive goals. He told me he knows that from first hand experience as an employer who, at the end of the day, has mutual inclusive goals with his employees and their union. "We want the same thing, success... businesses do best when their employees can work with dignity, respect and good livable wages-- when everyone mutually benefits." Jim was spontaneously endorsed by the union his workers belong to as soon as he announced he was running for Congress.

This morning Darcy Burner reminded us, once again, how good government isn't the enemy of our country. It's a servant of the people, a way to protect us from our real enemies, foreign and domestic. "Government isn't some abstract concept," she wrote, "it's made up of real people who work hard and help us face the challenges that we all worry about. Every time Republicans argue for cutting government to some mythically smaller size, what they are saying is they want less money for:

- Providing our active military and veterans with the income the need to survive and the health care they were promised when they volunteered to protect us,

- The retirement that our seniors earned and paid into for years,

- Regulating the Wall Street bankers who got rich gambling away our homes,

- Making sure that our education system can compete on a global scale,

- Protecting our environment and natural resources from Lake Washington to Mt. Baker so future generations can continue to enjoy them,

- The Food and Drug Administration's ability to make sure that we have safe and healthy food and prescription drugs.

"What we need is for our government to work for working Americans again-- not multimillionaires and corporations. In Congress, I’ll be a champion for fixing our broken Congress, bringing our troops and money back home, and will protect Social Security and Medicare."

We need people like Darcy Burner in government. Please consider helping her win her primary in Washington state against a self-funding corporate shill and tool of the special interests. You can contribute here.

Brooke Gladstone recalls when gov't and media colluded in propagating one of the most dangerous lies of the 20th century

The official position is that the [atom] bomb released no lethal radiation. Reports to the contrary are suppressed both in the U.S. and Japan.

In the New York Times, William Laurence ["Atomic Bill" was actually on the government payroll as a pro-atom-bomb propagandist] parrots the government.

"The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda, aimed at creating . . . sympathy for themselves . . . The Japanese described symptoms that did not ring true."

-- from The Influencing Machine (page 85)

Years later, [Chicago Daily News reporter George Weller, whose dispatches from the devastated target no. 2, Nagasaki, were blocked by General MacArthur's censors] says that every event has a moment when it can be understood politically. But if that moment is missed . . .

". . . the possibility of comprehension will never return again."

-- from The Influencing Machine (page 86)

by Ken

Last night I found myself in the unexpected position of more or less siding with NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg over his plan to limit sales of sugar-infested beverages in emporia under the jurisdiction of the city's health department to 16-oz. sizes, as a step toward combatting the obesity epidemic. It struck me as nice, for one thing, to see a government official in a position of authority embracing scientific (not to mention simply observable) reality.

After all, we live in a time when the bullying ascendancy of the Far Right, with its pitiless hatred of reality and its unquestioning worship of ignorance and delusion, has made it acceptable, and often mandatory, for both commentators and politicians to spew webs of anti-scientific lies. Instead of being carted off to mental health facilities for observation, the people who bray this nonsense are rewarded with honors and big-bucks employment and big bucks (media) and big-bucks payoffs contributions. (Yes, of course, standing in the background are the zillionaire commercial interests who stand to profit from the lies, and pay the liars accordingly.

In just about every area of scientific understanding of the world around us you can name, we now have an entire political party and an entire half (or more) of the political spectrum at war with reality. Reality, not surprisingly, is being routed. More power to Mayor Mike for repeatedly rejecting the conventional ignorance on a host of issues, including the obesity crisis.

BY THE WAY, A CERTAIN UPROAR CONTINUES
OVER THE MAYOR'S SUGARED-BEVERAGE PLAN

Yes, there are people screaming bloody murder about infringement on their right to sugar-saturate themselves, People should be responsible for their own choices, some voices say. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a frequent supporter of the mayor who clearly hopes to succeed him in City Hall, says what we need is education. Right, 'cause education, not to mention people being responsible for their own choices, has worked so well with the American diet -- and worked so well with, say, smoking.

Starbucks customers are apparently aghast that their beloved frappucino would fall afoul of the new regulations. I read in the paper that one of those suckers packs the sugar-and-calorie wallop of three Hershey bars. Maybe it's a good idea that the frappucino be targeted. Let people who want more than 16 ounces face up to their compulsion by being forced to buy a second, and a third, and . . .

Now, as I mentioned last night, I was approaching this latest skirmish with scientific reality fresh from what was for me a startling discovery in Brooke Gladstone's fascinating graphic not-a-novel The Influencing Machine, a stroll through the history and reality of the relationship between us and our media. It may be that I'm in fact the only person who didn't know this, but then, I can't understand why it isn't in the heads and coming out of the mouths of every schoolchild.

The easiest thing would be if you were to get hold of the book and turn to page 83, where Brooke's look back at the effect of war on the relationship between media people and government during reaches World War II. There were at least occasional exceptions to the prevailing preference for parroting official wisdom thanks to battlefield coverage by intrepid correspondents like Ernie Pyle. Except," she writes, "when the atomic bomb drops on August 6, 1945. The White House controls that story entirely."

"The government is gratified," Brooke notes, "that often the media print the official press release in their entirety," and she introduces us to "New York Times reporter William 'Atomic Bill' Laurence, longtime A-bomb advocate, now on the Pentagon payroll," who was "never on the ground in Japan" but is "on the plane that drops the bomb on Nagasaki," and watches with awe the "new species of being, born right before our incredulous eyes."

"Atomic Bill" Laurence, we learn, "gives short shrift" to reports of this "radiation" stuff of which word begins to seep out of Japan -- though rarely into the U.S. media, since reporters, are barred from visiting Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and dispatches from the Pacific are ruthlessly censored by General MacArthur's censors.

As Brooke notes, the White House has already perpetrated what she describes perhaps overcharitably as a "half-truth": the claim that Hiroshima was "an important Japanese Army base." Yes, the city contained an important army base, but it was a city, and a large and important one, and, oh yes, the bomb was dropped "in the very center" of that city. She points out that it was in fact part of "U.S. policy to bomb Japanese civilian centers to undermine morale."

Now none of this is what I didn't know, though there's a fair amount of useful filling in of detail. No, we're coming now to the part I didn't know. Let's turn to (a rather poor representation of) the book. (I'm afraid these scans and images are the best I could produce even with the benefit of a couple of hours of screaming and cursing. It's surprising how minimally helpful the screaming and cursing are if you really don't know what you're doing. I can report, though, that if you click on the graphics, they enlarge in such a way as to become eminently readable.)

[Again, by all means click to enlarge.]

Did you catch that?

"The official position is that the bomb released no lethal radiation. Reports to the contrary are suppressed both in the U.S. and Japan."

Then there's "Atomic Bill," the great authority on the atom bomb:

"The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda, aimed at creating . . . sympathy for themselves . . . The Japanese described symptoms that did not ring true."

And now we have a reporter whose debilitating experience with U.S. censorship of reality led him to formulate a theory about the very limited window that exists for making unpleasant realities understood by the public.

[Don't forget to click to enlarge.]

Suddenly I understand a lot better why The New Yorker's chose to devote that entire issue in August 1946 issue to John Hersey's Hiroshima, and why it caused such a sensation. Our government had been trying to perpetuate the appalling fiction that atomic radiation was a myth, some kind of Japanese propaganda -- perpetuated with the glad assistance of media whores who had never been anywhere near either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, or done anything to find out what had actually happened there.

As The Influencing Machine documents generously, there's nothing the least novel about large segments of the public believing lies. On the contrary, she shows us, it happens all the time, and always has. But jeez, when we consider that our government did everything in its power to pretend that there was no such thing as a problem of radiation connected with atomic power, why should we be surprised that our government, say, lied to us about Iraqi WMDs -- or, well, who knows what else?

#

Guest Post-- John Waltz (D-MI)

Seems these days wherever there's some kind of Republican hypocrisy explosion, we're finding Michigan SuperCommittee hereditary multimillionaire Fred Upton. So it didn't take long for Jed Lewison at Daily Kos to expose Upton's role in the Republican Party's trumped up attempt to politicize the Solyndra bankruptcy. Lewison makes the point that Upton "not only supported the program under which Solyndra received aide, [he] lobbied on behalf of companies in [his] district to receive the exact same sort of assistance... Upton not only helped pass the law, but he also used it to help his constituents. There's nothing wrong with that, but in light of his current scandalmongering, it's worth noting that less than two years ago, he was praising the Obama administration." Blue America has enthusiastically endorsed New Deal Democrat, John Waltz, for the MI-6 congressional seat that Upton thinks belongs to him. Please consider helping his campaign at our Blue America ActBlue page. We asked him to help explain a pattern of behavior by Upton in this matter.

Upton's Babies

by John Waltz

While our nation continues its economic struggles, Fred Upton has decided to distract everyone with a witch hunt. As soon as news broke of Solyndra going bankrupt, Upton went on to blast the program saying that Obama is trying to pick winners and losers. Without digressing into all the details of what happened with Solyndra, the real story is that Upton has no problem with our government picking winners and losers as long as they are his ‘winners’.

Among many of Upton’s ‘winners’ include heavily subsidizing the oil industry, securing nearly a billion dollars for factories, and his penchant for nuclear energy. The biggest federal grant request Upton asked for was $4 billion to expand the nuclear loan guarantee program. He knows the private sector would not even attempt building a nuclear facility without the full support of the government. 

This is another hypocritical play by Upton, where as long as it’s his ‘winner’ then it’s just ‘okie dokie’, but if Democrats ask for the same then it must be bad. I bet the millions he has received from energy companies helped sway this decision.

Republicans like Upton love to invest in the past by subsidizing fossil fuels and nuclear energy, which are obviously bad for the environment and do not help our nation progress to green energy. We have seen many times where nuclear power has created some of the worst disasters in history such as Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and in Japan after the earthquakes.

Just this week though in Michigan’s 6th Congressional District, we had a brush with disaster at the Palisades Nuclear Facility in South Haven. After an electrical accident, the plant had to vent radioactive steam into the air to stop a meltdown from happening. This accident came five short days after the plant had to shut down due to a leak in the plant’s cooling system.

It is bad enough the Kalamazoo River had a massive tar sand oil spill in July 2010, now we have to deal with the unknown effects of nuclear steam being pumped into our air? When will Upton get a clue? Being a Congressman is about representing the interests of your constituents, not a game where you are willing to sell us out to the highest corporate bidder to fill your campaign coffers. I guess if Upton had his way and dismantled the EPA then pesky nuclear accidents wouldn’t be an issue.

Another Pre-BIG-Scandal Buck McKeon Scandal

You could probably build a small home with all the botox in this photo

The point is being made-- loudly and clearly-- that while Republicans have been trying to politicize the Solyndra bankruptcy they themselves have been trying to steer $11.8 billion in loan guarantees to their own districts. It's the kind of hypocrisy we tied to Cliff Stearns (R-FL) over the weekend. Although Stephen Lacey hones in on corrupt and hypocritical Republicans like David Vitter (R-LA), Miss McConnell (R-KY), Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Fred Upton (R-MI), we've got a congresscritter right here in the L.A. area as guilty as the rest of them.

Buck McKeon-- soon to be drowning in a family bribery scandal-- has been one of the biggest corporate whores in Congress for years, taking massive bribes from shady for-profit college lenders and from shady war contractors, while he oversaw legislation in areas those special interested were especially interested in. Like his cronies Issa and Upton, McKeon has been a big proponent of wasting taxpayer dollars on dangerous nuclear facilities-- while taking gigantic bribes from the nuclear industry and while his Southern California constituents have very different ideas.

Forget crony capitalism. What we have here is phony capitalism.

A number of leading Republicans have repeatedly sought grants, tax credits and loan guarantees to support projects in their own districts. But when it’s politically advantageous, they now make the claim that government is “picking winners and losers” and violating the free market.

We all want to see taxpayer funds deployed as efficiently and fairly as possible.  Solar energy is soaring in this country and around the world, which suggests governmental support for the industry is working in a lot of countries. The nuclear industry has all but died in non-market economies, in spite of massive government support (see “Nuclear Pork-- Enough is Enough"). Which one is the winner and which is the loser?

General Atomics-- right up there among dozens of war contractors-- has been one of the biggest supporters of McKeon's political career-- $84,000 in legal contributions so far, his fifth biggest haul from any single company. Meanwhile, one of the biggest town's in McKeon's district (CA-25), Lancaster, was featured this week on NPR for going in an entirely different, non-McKeon backed, direction: solar. Transcript:

Lancaster, Calif., is just one struggling city that's beginning to invest in the sun.

ADRIENE HILL: New reports suggest renewable energy isn't the job engine that some hoped. But many struggling towns are paving the way for whatever green jobs they can get.

From the Marketplace sustainability desk, Eve Troeh reports.

EVE TROEH: Shoppers in the desert town of Lancaster, Calif., drive right past empty parking spaces near the front of a building. Here, a good spot means:

MAN: Shade.

TROEH: What happens if you don't find a spot in the shade?

MAN: You're gonna burn.

WOMAN: It's like walking into an inferno.

REX PARRIS: It's brutally painful.

That last voice is Lancaster mayor Rex Parris, at city hall. Even he had to park in the sun when he took office in 2008.

PARRIS: None of these were covered. You see, that's quite an expense.

Now, a private company-- Solar City-- has paid for roofs on public parking. It put solar panels on top, and sells the power to the city. It's one of many partnerships that's made Lancaster's city buildings 90 percent solar-powered.

PARRIS: And we sealed the cost at 13 cents a kilowatt.

Cheaper than the local utility. But Lancaster's got issues beyond hot cars and power bills, like high unemployment, rampant foreclosures. The last time the town really shone was the 1950s.

NEWSREEL: The Air Force rocket plane X-15 chalks up another record at Edwards Air Force Base in California.

From then until the '80s, research around the air base filled Lancaster with pilots and engineers. The mayor thinks solar start-ups can restore tech culture. He's offered tax breaks and fast-track permits.

PARRIS: If they come here, they can get on the grid faster, is really what it comes down to.

The city's cut paperwork for residential solar, too. That helped KB Home build its new all-solar subdivision: Arroyo. Vice president Tom DiPrima says it's selling.

TOM DIPRIMA: Thirty homes in about three months.

Families can get a solar system that covers almost all their energy.

DIPRIMA: The air's running, the lights are on in this house, but hen you look at the meter, it's barely turning.

But UCLA economist Jerry Nickelsburg says right now, solar power jobs are mostly short-term-- in construction.

JERRY NICKELSBURG: Renewable energy, once it's in place, typically does not take many employees to keep it going.

For real growth, Lancaster needs whole companies, and factories. A sunny reputation is just a start.

McKeon may not give a damn about clean energy or green energy or solar power-- or Lancaster for that matter-- but his Democratic opponent does. This morning Lee Rogers told us that "the solar industry in Lancaster is exactly the type of renewable energy in which we should invest... We need to put Californians back to work. Not only is it clean and efficient, but the industry has brought hundreds of jobs to Antelope Valley and will save the city millions of dollars in energy costs."

McKeon's 70 year old wife, Patricia, is running for the Assembly in the reddest part of his congressional district. Long his overpaid campaign treasurer (think back to the Doolittles)-- he's pushed over half a million dollars from his own campaign donations into "her" personal account (plus a $700/month Acura, all year long), Patricia also has a reputation of something of a bagwoman, accepting contributions from slimy war profiteers and anti-environmental outfits, i.e., people looking to funnel cash ole Buck's way... without triggering any icky congressional investigations.

The numbers measured in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear meltdown are only scary if you think about them

This memorial service for victims of the March 11 earthquake and tsunami was held on July 24 in Ohkuma-cho, Fukushima Prefecture, 20 kilometers from the Daiichi nuclear plant that melted down.

by Ken

Consider this my version of the Friday news dump. Here's a story I'm guessing hardly anybody wants to read. In a long and impressively detailed report in AlJazeera, "Fukushima radiation alarms doctors," reporter Dahr Jamail writes that (a) Japanese health-care officials are complaining ever more bitterly about what they see as the government's exceedingly lackadaisical approach to monitoring radiation levels in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear-plant disaster, and possibly related to the above (b) doctors believe they're already seeing the beginning -- and only the beginning -- of an alarming public health impact.

"How much radioactive materials have been released from the plant?" asked Dr Tatsuhiko Kodama, a professor at the Research Centre for Advanced Science and Technology and Director of the University of Tokyo's Radioisotope Centre, in a July 27 speech to the Committee of Health, Labour and Welfare at Japan's House of Representatives.



"The government and TEPCO have not reported the total amount of the released radioactivity yet," said Kodama, who believes things are far worse than even the recent detection of extremely high radiation levels at the plant. . . .

Kodama's centre, using 27 facilities to measure radiation across the country, has been closely monitoring the situation at Fukushima - and their findings are alarming.



According to Dr Kodama, the total amount of radiation released over a period of more than five months from the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster is the equivalent to more than 29 "Hiroshima-type atomic bombs" and the amount of uranium released "is equivalent to 20" Hiroshima bombs. [Emphasis added.]

The Fukushima meltdown, you'll recall, is the only nuclear incident beside the Chernobyl one to be rated Level 7 on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES), which reporter Jamail points out is defined as "a major release of radioactive material with widespread health and environmental effects requiring implementation of planned and extended countermeasures."

What's more, writes Jamail, "Doctors in Japan are already treating patients suffering health effects they attribute to radiation from the ongoing nuclear disaster."



"We have begun to see increased nosebleeds, stubborn cases of diarrhoea, and flu-like symptoms in children," Dr Yuko Yanagisawa, a physician at Funabashi Futawa Hospital in Chiba Prefecture, told Al Jazeera. 


She attributes the symptoms to radiation exposure, and added: "We are encountering new situations we cannot explain with the body of knowledge we have relied upon up until now."



"The situation at the Daiichi Nuclear facility in Fukushima has not yet been fully stabilised, and we can't yet see an end in sight," Yanagisawa said. "Because the nuclear material has not yet been encapsulated, radiation continues to stream into the environment."

There's more, oh so much more, but I think this is enough to prove my point: You don't want to read this, do you?

#

Let's Worry About BETTER Democrats And Let The Democratic Party Worry About More Of 'Em-- Time For Norman Solomon

This morning at 11am PT John and Digby are going to be hosting a live chat with Norman Solomon, a movement progressive running for the North San Francisco Bay area House seat being vacated by another progressive, Lynn Woolsey. The live chat will be at Crooks and Liars in the comments section. I hope you can join them... I'm in Asia and it'll be 1am on Wednesday and I'll be fast asleep.

If, like me, you can't make it to the chat, please consider contributing to Norman's campaign based on our last live chat with him, and on this letter we sent out to all Blue America members yesterday.

It was with gladness in our hearts that all of us at Blue America celebrated the state of New York legalizing gay marriage this past week-end. It was a welcome reminder that even in this era of Tea Parties and economic malaise, human progress cannot be stopped. Imagine if we had a national government with enough fighters for working families to make progress on all fronts from civil rights to economic justice to ending our useless expensive wars.  Imagine if we had more leaders like Raul Grijalva, Keith Ellison and Donna Edwards to press for that agenda.



Today, longtime progressive congresswoman Lynn Woolsey just announced her retirement from the Congress after a long and illustrious career. And Blue America endorsee and longtime political activist and author Normon Solomon stands ready and able to carry on the progressive tradition of that district.



We're asking you to help us help him run an effective campaign and win this seat. Will you give what you can today?



“We’re gaining the kind of traction that a grassroots campaign needs in order to win,” Solomon said. “The groundswell of support is very encouraging.”



Indeed it is. We need congressional representatives who understand that we are no longer able to afford open ended military adventures and corrupt political boondoggles and Norman has been fighting to end them his entire life.These issues are no longer matters of abstract ideology-- they are necessary and pragmatic approaches to the problems of our time. We need people like Norman Solomon in congress to lead the way.



Blue America will be hosting Norman in a live chat at Crooks and Liars on Tuesday at 2pm EDT/11 am PDT. Please join us.



And please help Norman with a donation if you can.



The good news is that it looks as though we aren't the only progressives who are enthusiastic about him-- the campaign has managed to collect $100,000 already from small donors. But he is not a corporate funded Democrat and will need our help to compete. 



Thanks again for your support. We hope you'll join us on Tuesday for a lively discussion. 



We are all in this together.

Yesterday Norman penned a guest Op-Ed for the Marin Independent Journal that presents a lot of insight into what kind of congressman he'd be-- and into why Blue America is so committed to his candidacy. I bet this is what you wish YOUR congressmember and senator-- not to mention our president-- was saying about the dangers of nuclear energy... and what to do about it. But they're not. It's why it's so crucial that we need real leaders like Norman Solomon, not just someone who will probably vote well in the House.

Several decades ago, three expert nuclear engineers told a congressional panel why they decided to quit: "We could no longer justify devoting our life energies to the continued development and expansion of nuclear fission power-- a system we believe to be so dangerous that it now threatens the very existence of life on this planet."

The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy heard that testimony in 1977, when the conventional wisdom was still hailing "the peaceful atom" as a flawless marvel. During the same year, solid information convinced me to move from concern to action against nuclear power.

By the time the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant came close to rendering much of central Pennsylvania uninhabitable, I was nearly two years into full-time anti-nuclear work that included public education, civic activism and nonviolent direct action. Given what was at stake, I didn't mind spending a month in jail for civil disobedience.

More than 30 years later, the ongoing disaster at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant underscores the grim realities of nuclear power, ranging from catastrophic reactor accidents to highly radioactive waste that will remain deadly for many thousands of years.

Such inherent dangers are all too close to home here in California, where the state's two nuclear power plants-- Diablo Canyon at San Luis Obispo and San Onofre farther south-- are both located on major earthquake faults along the coast.

The overall record of Diablo Canyon's owner and operator-- PG&E-- hardly inspires confidence. And recent events in Japan showed that official assurances can become worthless after a big quake and tsunami.

Continuing radioactive leaks from Fukushima are extensive and multifaceted. The authoritative journal Nature reported in late May that "some scientists are simply floating the idea of turning Fukushima into a nuclear graveyard"-- but "given the plant's location on the coast, storing the waste there for millennia may be unrealistic."

Here at home, I fundamentally disagree with the official mantra that California's two nuclear power plants should keep operating while federal agencies conduct "studies" to determine whether those nukes are risky enough to warrant closure.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Energy Department have been avidly promoting nuclear power for decades. Periodic calls for more "studies" have kicked the radioactive can down the road.

I reject the notion that we should wait for such nuclear-enthralled agencies to tell us whether nuclear power is an acceptable risk for Californians.

As the director of the National Citizens Hearings for Radiation Victims in 1980, I learned a lot about patterns of official enabling of the nuclear industry-- with awful results for human health and the environment.

Similar patterns persist in this country.

In contrast, the government of Germany has seen the light. At the end of last month, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced a reversal of policy-- moving to shut down nuclear power instead of trying to expand it.

The decision to immediately close eight German nuclear power plants and shut the rest by 2022 came in a country that had been getting 23 percent of its electricity from nukes.

Here in California, we're less reliant on this Faustian technology, getting just 15 percent of our electricity from nuclear power. The state has a lot of excess generating capacity from other sources, but far better choices for the environment are within our grasp.

Effective conservation options are readily available, and widespread use of renewables like solar is in reach. What we need is the political will to fight for serious public investment in sustainable energy and a non-nuclear future.

Please consider helping Norman bring this kind of thinking to Washington by contribution to his campaign through ActBlue. Norman summed his platform up in one powerful sentence today saying is he's elected to Congress, he "will insist that we need to bring our troops and tax dollars home-- that we need healthcare not warfare-- that we must resist corporate power-- that caving in to Wall Street and polluters and enemies of civil liberties is unacceptable." Your kind of guy?

Germany Will Phase Out All Nuclear Energy Within One Decade... What About Us?

Last March we noted that the nuclear catastrophe in Fukushima had repercussions for the right-wing government in Berlin. Germany's most consistently conservative state government fell to the Greens. And, compared to the U.S., Germany actually has a pretty progressive policy towards a renewable energy future. Our own country's political elites don't seem to have the inclination or the will to change course on nuclear power. It's part of the reason Blue America has been so supportive of Norman Solomon's congressional candidacy. Norman:

The facts all point to this “inconvenient truth”-- the time has come to shut down California’s two nuclear power plants as part of a swift transition to an energy policy focused on clean and green renewable sources and conservation.

The Diablo Canyon plant near San Luis Obispo and the San Onofre plant on the southern California coast are vulnerable to meltdowns from earthquakes and threaten both residents and the environment.

Reactor safety is just one of the concerns. Each nuclear power plant creates radioactive waste that will remain deadly for thousands of years. This is not the kind of legacy that we should leave for future generations.

In the wake of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown, we need a basic rethinking of the USA’s nuclear energy use and oversight. There is no more technologically advanced country in the world than Japan. Nuclear power isn’t safe there, and it isn’t safe anywhere.

...Our tax dollars should not be used to subsidize the nuclear power industry. Instead, we should be investing far more in solar, wind and other renewable sources, along with serious energy conservation.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is a nuclear-friendly fox guarding the radioactive chicken coop. The federal government has no business promoting this dangerous industry while safe and sustainable energy resources are readily available.

Is this the way you feel about nuclear energy as well? Not many candidates for Congress would agree. And it's a perspective desperately needed inside the Democratic caucus. Please consider helping Norman Solomon get his message out in one of the congressional districts where people are likeliest to see it the same way. You can contribute to his election campaign here.

Back to Germany for a moment. Over the weekend Germany's coalition government has announced a reversal of policy that will see all the country's nuclear power plants phased out by 2022.

The decision makes Germany the biggest industrial power to announce plans to give up nuclear energy.

Environment Minister Norbert Rottgen made the announcement following late-night talks.
Chancellor Angela Merkel set up a panel to review nuclear power following the crisis at Fukushima in Japan.

There have been mass anti-nuclear protests across Germany in the wake of March's Fukushima crisis, triggered by an earthquake and tsunami.

Mr Rottgen said the seven oldest reactors-- which were taken offline for a safety review immediately after the Japanese crisis - would never be used again. An eighth plant - the Kruemmel facility in northern Germany, which was already offline and has been plagued by technical problems, would also be shut down for good.

Six others would go offline by 2021 at the latest and the three newest by 2022, he said.

Mr Rottgen said: "It's definite. The latest end for the last three nuclear power plants is 2022. There will be no clause for revision."

Germany, which depends on nuclear plants for nearly a quarter of its electric energy production, plans to make up for the loss with wind and solar energy, two areas in which it is technologically way ahead of the U.S., thanks to the relentless opposition of Big Oil in this country, along with their lapdog Republican and Blue Dog allies. Progressives all over the country are beginning to deploy aggressive clean energy agendas as electoral strategies, from Nick Ruiz in Florida to a new candidate we'll be hearing more from later this week, Dan Powers in Minnesota.

It’s Time to Close California’s Nuclear Power Plants... A Guest Post By Norman Solomon

A few weeks ago Blue America endorsed Norman Solomon for the North Bay seat Lynn Woolsey is expected to give up next year. People have asked me why the rush and pointed out that some of the other candidates are "liberals" too, "like Norman." There are very few people "like Norman." He's not just a movement progressive-- rather than a "liberal too"-- his is a voice that has helped define what the progressive movement in America is. If you can, please consider making a donation to Norman's campaign. As you'll be able to see from the guest post below, it's not likely he'll be funded by any of the utilities who have given generously to the "liberals too" running against him for the nomination.

It’s Time to Close California’s Nuclear Power Plants

By Norman Solomon

The facts all point to this “inconvenient truth”-- the time has come to shut down California’s two nuclear power plants as part of a swift transition to an energy policy focused on clean and green renewable sources and conservation.

The Diablo Canyon plant near San Luis Obispo and the San Onofre plant on the southern California coast are vulnerable to meltdowns from earthquakes and threaten both residents and the environment.

Reactor safety is just one of the concerns. Each nuclear power plant creates radioactive waste that will remain deadly for thousands of years. This is not the kind of legacy that we should leave for future generations.

In the wake of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown, we need a basic rethinking of the USA’s nuclear energy use and oversight. There is no more technologically advanced country in the world than Japan. Nuclear power isn’t safe there, and it isn’t safe anywhere.

The perils to people are clear. In a recent letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein noted that “roughly 424,000 live within 50 miles of the Diablo Canyon and 7.4 million live within 50 miles of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.”

As someone who was an Obama delegate to the 2008 Democratic National Convention, I believe it would be a tragic mistake for anyone to loyally accept the administration’s nuclear policy. The White House is fundamentally mistaken in its efforts to triple the budgeting of federal loan guarantees for the domestic nuclear power industry, from $18 billion to $54 billion.

Our tax dollars should not be used to subsidize the nuclear power industry. Instead, we should be investing far more in solar, wind and other renewable sources, along with serious energy conservation.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is a nuclear-friendly fox guarding the radioactive chicken coop. The federal government has no business promoting this dangerous industry while safe and sustainable energy resources are readily available.

The fact that federal law imposes a liability cap of about $12 billion on a nuclear power accident is a reflection of the fact that those plants are uninsurable on the open market.

As a candidate for Congress in the district that includes Marin and Sonoma counties, I intend to make this a major campaign issue. It remains to be seen whether my one declared opponent, Assemblyman Jared Huffman, will join me in urging a rapid timetable for the closure of California’s nuclear power plants.

Huffman has ties to California’s nuclear-invested utility PG&E. Between 2007 and 2009, according to campaign finance data compiled by nonpartisan Maplight.org, he received $11,100 from PG&E, which owns and operates the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant.

While Huffman and other state lawmakers in February signed a letter to a federal commission on America’s nuclear future citing seismic “concerns which deserve to be more closely examined,” the time for equivocation on nuclear power is long past. We don’t need yet more study on whether to operate nuclear plants on fault lines.

People want bold and responsible leadership as we face up to the well-documented realities of nuclear power on this fragile planet.

Was Fukushima Not Enough Of A Warning For America's Ruling Elite? Does It Have to Happen Here?

Saturday there was a rally on the Avila Beach pier in San Luis Obispo to protest the license renewal for PG&E's ancient Diablo Canyon nuclear plant. PG&E is asking to renew the troubled facility until 2045 right in the middle of seismic studies to learn more about two earthquake faults found offshore of the plant. More than a few Californians feel Diablo Canyon and San Onofre are disasters waiting to happen. If what happened at Fukushima happened in California the consequences could be hundreds of times more catastrophic, with millions of people affected.

The Diablo plant sits almost on top of the Hosgri Fault, which reportedly has the same dangerous characteristics as the fault outside of Sendai, Japan. And geologists just discovered another fault running 300 yards from the Diablo plant gates.

“Any corporation can make a mistake,” [local radio talk show host Dave] Congalton added, “and the more people who work for them, the higher the likelihood there is going to be some kind of mistake.”

This is reality, even though PG&E, the National Regulatory Commission (NRC) and California regulatory agencies may do everything within their powers to attain the highest degree of safety possible-- theoretically, at least.

What many, if not most, of Diablo’s thousands of nearby neighbors don’t seem to understand is that there can be no assurance of safety from an earthquake, a tsunami (even though Diablo is 85 feet above sea level), a terrorist attack and now conceivably with climate change (as evidenced by  rising sea levels), possible lightning strikes. The risks are almost endless.

The best available and emerging technology can significantly increase safety and minimize the risks of an accident, a fire, an explosion, a release of  radioactivity, or an operational error-- like the recently-discovered failure by operators at Diablo to realize that a system to pump water into one of the  reactors during an emergency had not been working-- for 18 months. The incident is being called a “near miss” by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

As experts outside the nuclear industry and government emphasize, there is no way to prevent what could mushroom into another Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, or Japanese disaster.

“A lot of little things happen (at nuclear plants) that can lead to big things happening,” said Stephanie Cooke, author of “In Mortal Hands: A Cautionary History of the Nuclear Age,” in a radio interview recently. “We don’t really know how that happens.” Ms. Cooke has covered the nuclear industry for thirty years.

“There have been many accidents (at nuclear plants),” she said. “but they are hard to find out about. We don’t hear about them. They are reported to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), but it is hard to get access to information from it. I talked to a former NRC official who said he was very surprised how hard it is to find information on its site. A lot of this stuff is written in very complicated language that is hard to understand.

A few days ago I heard a California legislator-- I think Fiona Ma (D-SF)-- on the radio talking about how earthquake faults are not taken into consideration when license renewals are granted, although NRC regulations require companies that build nuclear plants to take into account local seismic history and fortify the plants against the largest quake that is likely to occur. Yesterday's USAToday ran a feature by Steve Sternberg warning that 5 nuclear reactors are in earthquake zones, the two in California plus the South Texas Project near the Gulf Coast; the Waterford Steam Electric Station in Louisiana; and the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant in North Carolina.

San Onofre, for instance, is built to withstand a magnitude-7.0 earthquake within 5 miles of the site, he said. In addition, the plant is 30 feet above sea level and has a reinforced concrete sea wall that is 30 feet tall and could withstand a 27-foot tsunami.

Japan's Fukushima Dai-ichi plant suffered major damage from a magnitude-9.0 earthquake and 46-foot tsunami that hit March 11. The disaster triggered nuclear radiation leaks and an extensive evacuation in the region around the plant, which was built to withstand a 19-foot tsunami.

After installing solar panels on my roof, I now generate more electricity than I consume. My electric bill went from $1,000 a month to zero. I can't understand why builders aren't required to put in solar generating capacity on every new building in California. The 104 American nuclear plants produce around 20% of the nation's energy. That should all be replaced with solar energy. Stephanie Cooke, author of In Mortal Hands: A Cautionary History of the Nuclear Age, believes nuclear energy has become part of American culture over the past half century due to this overriding equation: technology = progress=prosperity. The tendency was to “ignore the pitfalls. How to survive and where to put the (nuclear) waste? We’ll figure that out as we go along."

All nuclear waste-- the media often call it “spent fuel” as a more benign term-- must be stored on each plant’s site. Diablo has on its site 2642 assemblies (bundles) of spent fuel and 1136 metric tons of uranium, the A4NR says based on state data obtained from PG&E. If the plant operates through 2025, 1168 more assemblies and 717 more metric tons of uranium will be added, and if its license is renewed through 2045, another 2112 assemblies and 908 metric tons of uranium will be added.

Such waste is probably the least acknowledged dangerous aspect of a nuclear plant. “U.S. nuclear power plants that store thousands of metric tons of spent atomic fuel pose risks of a crisis like the one unfolding in Japan, where crews are battling to prevent a meltdown of stored fuel, nuclear safety experts said,” Bloomberg News reported.

It just keeps piling up at plants. There is no prospect for storing it at some central site within the U.S. because no state would take it. So the risk just builds and builds with no end in sight. And it is vulnerable to dangers from loss of cooling water and terrorist attacks.

Another aspect of radiation that is virtually never mentioned is the radioactive waste left behind when uranium in mined. Little, if any, uranium is mined in or near California, but it doesn’t have to be in order to feel the effects. When uranium is extracted from the ground, great amounts of rock come with it, and then it is crushed, and finely-pulverized material is left behind, much like flour, according to Dr. Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. A great deal of uranium is mined in Canada.

“These tailings are left on the surface of the earth, they are blown by the wind, they are washed by the rain into the water systems, and they inevitably spread,” he said in a 1992 speech, for undetermined distances, polluting water, exposing people to radiation and resulting in “mental retardation in children who were irradiated while still in the womb.” And “the effective half-life of this radioactivity is 80,000 years,” he added.

Renewables are a clean, viable alternative to all this and already on the horizon. The question is: how close? Or could they be brought closer with accelerated prioritizing by the state? The utilities, like PG&E, themselves are developing significant renewable portfolios.

California has a goal of achieving 20 percent energy generation in the state from renewables by 2012 and 33% by 2020. Some 653 megawatts (MW) of new renewables came on line in 2010, almost double the amount of new renewables in 2009,  a California Public Utilities report in December said most of it was produced from hydroelectric and wind from a big new wind farm in Tehachapi.

“To date, 1,702 MW of new renewable capacity has achieved commercial operation” since 2003. The new renewable capacity consisted of solar panels, biomass, small hydroelectric, biogas and wind. The report focused on renewables being developed by the state’s three utilities, PG&E, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric.

It said the renewables program has contracts that would meet the 33 percent goal by 2020 but cautioned that some contracts could fail to produce their commitments.
The state also is three years into its 10-year California Solar Initiative (CSI) with 79,128 solar projects underway, which it says leads the nation. A joint effort of the California Energy Commission and the California Public Utilities Commission, the goal is to encourage the installation of 3,000 MW of solar energy systems on homes and businesses by the end of 2016. Another goal is to install 585 million therms of gas-displacing solar hot water systems by the end of 2017.

In the first three years of the CSI’s Go Solar program, the state is 42% of the way towards its general market program goal in the territories of the investor-owned utilities. This figure includes both projects already installed and those currently holding reservations for incentives and in the process of being installed.

California has over 600 MW of solar connected to the electric grid at nearly 65,000 customer sites. Of the 598 MW of capacity installed in investor-owned utility territories, 342 MW were installed under the CSI Program at 31,000 sites, as well as 256 MW installed through other programs.

However, it is not clear from state reports the extent to which such programs can be relied upon to replace nuclear and fossil-fuel energy or whether renewables are seen as sources to meet the growing energy needs of California. A reassessment of the overall purpose and potential would seem to be in order in light of the questions being raised about the wisdom of continuing to rely on nuclear energy.

The state has a Department of Conservation under the Natural Resources Agency, whose new director is John Laird, the Democratic candidate for state Senate from this area in last August’s special election. But its mission is to provide service and information that promote environmental health, economic vitality, informed land-use decisions and sound management of our state’s natural resources. It makes no mention of encouraging or suggesting ways for the public to conserve energy through their own actions and in their own dwellings.

But there are private efforts being made. EcoMall, the website of Ecology America, Inc., advocates reducing your footprint on the planet by purchasing products and services that don’t harm the environment and lists a wide array of products and the businesses that sell them. But it also recommends “20 Things You Can Do To Conserve Energy,” including using energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs, “reduce, reuse, recycle” and even “keep track of the environmental voting records of candidates for office. Stay abreast of environmental issues on both local and national levels, and write or call your elected officials to express your concerns about energy efficiency and global warming.”

Another one lists many ways to use less electricity and also warns about “Energy Vampires,” the electrical products that keep using electricity even when turned off.

Whether state legislators are aware of the extent to which conservation as a policy initiative is being ignored by the state is not known. One amateur conservationist, who has his energy bills down to miniscule levels, speculated that conservation practiced by a large number of Californians could put Diablo out of business in no time. Perhaps someone ought to find out if he is right.

The real question is whether or not there is the political will to make a sea change in the nation's energy policy. Obama understands it and has made some significant movements in that direction. The Republican Party has politicized it as an issue and made it next to impossible for a weak president like Obama to proceed. I guess if something like Fukushima happens in America, Republicans can blame Obama and the necessary sea change will happen-- on the graves of God-knows-how-many Americans. Germany has a much less dysfunctional response-- even if the Conservatives had to suffer a post-Fukushima electoral catastrophe in Baden-Württemberg first.

Germany’s utility companies want “swift and complete” abolishment of nuclear power in the wake of the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima reactors, says their umbrella organization.

The technology should be phased out by 2020 or at the latest by 2023, the German Association of Energy and Water Industries, BDEW, said Friday following a board meeting.

Up until today the organization had been fully behind nuclear energy, but the events in Japan caused the dramatic U-turn.

The group called on the government to set everything in motion to speed up the transition toward a stable, ecologically responsible and affordable energy mix without nuclear energy.

“The catastrophe at the Fukushima reactors marks a new era and the BDEW therefore calls for a swift and complete exit from using nuclear power,” the group said in a statement... Germany, Europe’s biggest economy, stands alone among the world’s leading industrialized nations in its determination to overcome nuclear power.