UNITE! Info #224en: 1/2 Petition for nukeplant Bb 2
From: Rolf Martens (rolf.martens_at_mailbox.swipnet.se)
Date: 12/08/04
- Next message: Rolf Martens: "UNITE! Info #224en: 2/2 Petition for nukeplant Bb 2"
- Previous message: Bill Ward: "Re: Hydrogen Production Method Could Bolster Fuel Supplies"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:28:27 +0100
UNITE! Info #224en: 1/2 Petition for nukeplant Bb 2
[Posted: 08.12.2004]
Note / Anmerkung / Note / Nota / Anmärkning:
On the UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! /
¡UNIOS! / FÖRENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
See information on the last page / Siehe Information auf der
letzten Seite / Verrez information à la dernière page / Ver
información en la última página / Se information på sista sidan
INTRO NOTE:
Several earlier items in this series have had as their main
subjects that "green" warfare which, since several decades
back, the main reactionaries in the world are directing at
the people everywhere.
This warfare aims, by various measures which in the main do
not include such open violence as shooting, shelling or bomb-
ing but which are on the level of a war anyway, to prevent the
further development of industry or even to destroy such which
has already been constructed. It hurts and kills people on an
even larger scale that does, for instance, the also ongoing
aggression against Iraq.
One particular direct target of this warfare is the peaceful
utilization of nuclear energy (as mentioned and explained too
in many earlier items of this series).
Concerning nuclear energy, one well-known scientist, Linus
Pauling, wrote in 1953 that its utilization was the most im-
portant discovery made by man since that of the utilization
of fire. This at least was not far wrong. But today, the in-
ternational system of society has degenerated so far that it
more and more appears to be incompatible, even, with that par-
ticularly advanced energy source.
The present Info reproduces in translation a petition plus
appended information text, set up by the Committee Save Bar-
sebäck in Swedish at:
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/SaveBbNP/petition.html.
Its headline (in English) is "Don't Shut Down Barsebäck 2".
The information text recounts some details of how a part of
that "green" warfare mentioned is being fought out here in
Sweden - a small country but a relatively important one con-
cerning precisely nuclear energy. In earlier decades, precise-
ly here, the largest capacity for nuclear electricity produc-
tion per inhabitant was constructed. And also, the later
about-turn concerning this by the persons in power has been
particularly abrupt here, no doubt largely because of pressure
in this direction from the government of the USA.
The Committee Save Barsebäck is a small non-party-political
organization, founded here in Malmö in 1997, of which I'm a
member.
It now engages also in a certain poster campaign, for informa-
tion about its petition and further propaganda against the
anti-nuclear-energy campaign engaged in by the government here
and by its international "overlords". Our posters, headlined
"Don't shut down Barsebäck 2! Stop attacking the nuclear power
plants!", also contain a drawing, made by Klas Hellborg, Lund,
in 1988:
It shows a hand trying to grab one of the two blocks of a nuc-
lear power plant, simliar to the nearby Barsebäck one. That
hand howvever is soon to be hit by a (shift key) spanner
struck down from above. (A symbolism, hopefully, of what
should take place, and one of what in part is already taking
place too.)
So far, our petition has gotten rather fewer signatories than
we originally hoped for. One reason for this probably is the
fact that our committee cannot reach, with its information,
all that many people. A good thing anyway is that relatively
many in neigbouring Denmark have signed it. The government
here, stupidly, has tried to blame its own destructive actions
against nuclear power on "the Danes' being against it" - which
in fact is not the case either.
It's very clear anyway that many in Sweden are quite angry at
the latest such destruction plans of the country's goverment.
Even the regional leadership in the southern province of Skåne
(Scania) of the union of trade unions (the LO), usually quite
docile to the social-democratic government, has protested
against it.
The government of Sweden has announced that it wants the Bar-
sebäck 2 reactor to be shut down as early as on 31.05.2005.
Whether then or somewhat later, such an action would have
disastrous consequenses. Will the government succeed in car-
rying it out, in the face of the (mostly silent, but angry)
opposition by the people here, anyway? That remains to be
seen.
Here follow the petition and its appended information text.
End of intro note
At http://www.PetitionOnline.com/SaveBbNP/petition.html:
Don't shut down Barsebäck 2! Stop attacking the nuclear power
plants!
To the government of Sweden
To the parliament of Sweden
We, the undersigned, demand that the Swedish government
immediately cancel its plans to cause the nuclear power
reactor Barsebäck 2 in southern Sweden to be shut down and
later destroyed.
We demand that the Swedish parliament stop these plans, and
all plans aimed at closing other well-functioning nuclear
power plants as well.
We demand that the likewise effective, safe and environment-
friendly reactor Barsebäck 1, which was scandalously shut
down in 1999 straight against the wishes of a broad majority
of people in Sweden, be restarted.
We demand that all those bans by law against the utilization,
expansion and further development of nuclear power technology
which exist in Sweden be removed.
We demand that a new and genuine referendum on nuclear power
be held in Sweden, one in which it will be possible to vote
"yes" to this particularly modern energy source and not only
"no" to it.
[For INFORMATION to the readers of this petition, we who
have set it up, the Committee Save Barsebäck, are appending
the below eight points. For these points, only we, and not
the signatories of the petition, are responsible.
1. A SERIOUS FURTHER ATTACK ON THE PROVISIONING
OF ELECTRICITY
In October 2004, the Swedish government and two political
parties which are supporting it announced that they wanted
the nuclear power reactor Barsebäck 2 to be shut down in 2005
and later destroyed.
For this there is not the slightest reason, concerning opera-
tional safety or the environment, for instance. This plant is
functioning excellently. It produces as much as 3% of all
electricity used in this country. It employs the, by far,
most modern, cheapest and most environment-friendly technology
for this that is known today.
One must protest against these closure plans! The vast majori-
ty of so-called ordinary people in this country must, as far
as possible, intervene and put pressure on to the government
and the parliament, so as to prevent these plans from being
carried out.
We call on all persons and organizations who are for progress
and who do not hold that one must accept all so called Edicts
from the Powers, to support this petition and to help disse-
minate information about it. We shall hold it open for signing
up until a week before the Swedish parliament takes up its
stand on the matter.
2. THE DESTRUCTION IN THIS FIELD ALREADY HAS
GONE FAR
Already today, the situation concerning the electricity provi-
sioning in this country is precarious, because of earlier pa-
ralysing measures.
The electricity prices have skyrocketed. This hits very hard
both directly the individual consumers and also industry, and
thus employment.
The production capacity for electricity already is unsuffi-
cient. Sweden today has become constantly dependent on imports
for its provisioning with this important basic commodity. In
a reasonably cold winter, this is not enough either. Rationing
then will have to be resorted to, a measure for a country at
war or in some other serious crisis.
If Barsebäck 2 is shut down too, the situation for the energy
provisioning will become disastrous, in particular in southern
Sweden.
3. ALL THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS ARE THREATENED.
FURTHER CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT TODAY
ARE BANNED.
In 1980, the parliament took a decision on principle that all
use of nuclear energy in this country was to be "phased out",
that is, cease and then be banned for all future. It set up a
law against there ever being constructed new nuclear power
plants, other than those existing or started on in 1980, in
Sweden.
In 1987, there was enacted a law which prohibits all research
and projecting with a view to constructing a nuclear power
reactor in Sweden - the particularly infamous so-called
Thought Ban Law.
These extremely retrogressive laws still are in force. They
have been set up, quite contrary to the interests and the
wishes of the majority of the people, by a small number of
persons in power. Everybody else in Sweden must protest most
sharply against these laws too, we hold.
4. BRIEFLY ON WHY NUCLEAR POWER IS THE CLEARLY
SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY FOR PRODUCING ELECTRICITY
Since a long time back the politicians, not least those who
pretend to be "of the people" or "leftist", all the mass media
and eventually the school textbooks too have been dissemina-
ting many untruths concerning energy in general and nuclear
energy in particular. It is natural if some people have be-
come deceived by this. But it is obvious that, despite every-
thing, most people by far in Sweden have not.
Everybody with Internet access today can find out the facts
in this field by him/herself. A few important such we shall
mention here.
It is because of the laws of nature that the nuclear technolo-
gy is such a big step forward and has such a big development
potential, compared to all other methods for producing elec-
tricity. With this technology, matter itself is being conver-
ted into energy, in accordance with that earlier so well-
known relation in physics E=mc². This gives enormous amounts
of energy with only small resources.
>From one single kilogram of uranium, in Barsebäck for instan-
ce, as much as 60,000 kWh of electricity is produced. There-
for, such electricity production, already today, is very
cheap. It costs some 20-25 öre [3-4 cents in US currency - RM]
per kWh. That long-since planned but enormously politically-
delayed further development, breeder reactors, provides over
2 million kWh of electricity per kg of uranium. These amounts
should be compared to the amounts produced by use of that
still relatively modern (chemical) fuel, oil, which are only
some 12 kWh of heat or 4 kWh of electricity per kg.
The current from hydropower plants too is relatively cheap,
but in Sweden for instance, there is only a small potential
for further construction of such plants.
In air in motion there are only very small amounts of energy
per m³ of it. Therefore, so-called wind power plants, irres-
pective of far the technology for them is developed, can only
produce electricity very expensively, hardly for less than
some 1 SKR [15 cents in US currency - RM] per kWh. When the
state makes the public pay for the construction of such by
subventioning it, this is a waste of resources, and it is not
intended either as a means for achieving cheap and environ-
ment-friendly production of electricity. The object entirely
is that of trying to fool people into believing that there are
good alternatives to nuclear power. Those wind power plants
which are being erected today, in the 21st century, are propa-
ganda propellers. They are monuments over a political and
economic decay in society.
The same is the case concerning a number of other impractical
technologies which the politicians, the mass media and the
school textbooks today are maintaining are "alternative" or
"renewable" energy sources. The propaganda for them aims to
mislead people in similar manners.
5. IS IT TRUE THAT "NUCLEAR ENERGY HAS SOME
SERIOUS TECHNICAL PROBLEMS WHICH HAVE BEEN
DISCOVERED ONLY IN MORE RECENT YEARS"?
No, not at all. This is how a certain propaganda wants to
"explain" that fact that those in power in Sweden and in many
other countries in the last few decades have made a complete
about-turn concerning nuclear power plants. Earlier, they had
such constructed, and they themselves quite rightly spoke of
this technology as being an important piece of progress. Today
the most influential among them, on the contrary, are very
anxious to shut all nuclear power plants down and even ban
precisely the nuclear technology for all future.
But some purported "serious technical problems" with electri-
city production by means of nuclear power are not the real
reason for this about-turn. There are no such, neither "old"
nor "recently-discovered" ones.
Since nuclear technology makes it possible to extract such
enormous amounts of energy out of only small amounts of mat-
ter, this also provides economic scope for sufficient measures
for achieving safety of operation in all those steps of pro-
duction which this technology needs: Uranium mining, enrich-
ment, production of nuclear fuel, nuclear power plants, pos-
sibly reprocessing for extracting new fuel out of used such
and storing of residual products (so-called wastes).
In the last few decades, there in many parts of the world have
occurred manipulations, assaults and sabotage with aims hos-
tile to the people everywhere, actions directed against nuc-
lear power plants or against other buildings and/or against
passenger aircraft or ships. Combat and prevent such things
you of course cannot do by, perhaps, closing down shipyards,
aircraft factories or power plants, but only by putting a
stop to those who are responsible for such acts of sabotage,
assault and manipulation.
Concerning the Barsebäck plant, certain politicians even main-
tain that it is "badly placed" since it is situated "close to"
large population centres. This is nonsense of course. Many
nuclear power plants in other countries in Europe are situated
much closer to much larger population centres. And like those
others, this power plant constitutes no "danger" at all, to
people living nearby or to others.
Those radioactive residual products which are being created
in the nuclear power plants today most often are called
"wastes". A certain propaganda since a long time back con-
stantly is repeating: "The nuclear wastes question is not
solved - therefore, the nuclear power plants must be shut
down." This proposition is false, for several reasons.
These residual products never have constituted a problem of
any importance. The amounts of them are very small. They can
be considered as wastes, and stored as such in a suitable
underground storage, even for a very long time if this should
be needed, at a cost of less than 1 öre [1.5 mill in US cur-
rency - RM] per kWh of electricity, which the electricity con-
sumers in Sweden already are paying for this today.
Furthermore, these residual products in due time will turn
into an asset. They may become a such even in a relatively
near future. Ideas about how that extra energy which they
contain can be utilized, and their radioactivity at the same
time removed, already exist today. The "predictions" by some
propagandists against nuclear power about "dangerous wastes
from them having to be stored for hundreds or thousands of
years" are quite unrealistic. They presume that no technology
for utilizing economically such energy-rich substances would
be developed, even in such a long time.
It is obvious that the so-called "technical reasons" for shut-
ting down and banning nuclear power plants are pretexts, on
the part of the persons in power. It is other motives that are
lying behind this.
6. WHAT DO THE GOVERNMENT OF SWEDEN AND SOME OTHERS
WANT, THEN? WHY IS, SINCE LONG, PRECISELY THE
MOST MODERN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY BEING ATTACKED SO
INTENSIVELY?
Since over 30 years back now, a campaign against nuclear
energy and against other modern technologies has been engaged
in internationally. This above all is because the politically
and economically most powerful persons in the world have come
to fear that the technical and industrial development will
lead to their losing their position of power, and thus their
profits. Therefore, they now want to whip large parts of that
development back.
Modern conditions, with constant development of technology and
increase of industrial production, mean bigger profits for
those who own the industries but also a constant increase in
the number of industrial workers, who then together with
others can force through bigger and bigger economic and also
democratic demands.
That is why the politicians in the most important relatively
highly-developed countries today prefer there to be stagnation
and high unemployment. As a part of their striving for this,
they willedly are going in for making all energy as scarce and
expensive as possible. With laws in that direction they are
holding back such private industry owners who still want pro-
duction to increase.
It is because of this aim of theirs, which they are hiding be-
hind false and upside-down talk about "the environment", "sus-
tainable development" etc, that precisely the very most mo-
dern, the most environment-friendly and most long-term sus-
tainable technology for producing energy, nuclear power, has
become a particular hate object for most of those politicians,
and for all the mass media, in the "industrial countries".
Here in Sweden, the attacks on nuclear power, and those
against some other important branches of industry too, have
gone particularly far. This has to do with the position that
Sweden takes up in the present-time world system. Those in
power in this country listen with very keen ears to signals
from what they hold to be "Higher Powers".
Against this it is that most people need to act.
[Continued in part 2/2]
- Next message: Rolf Martens: "UNITE! Info #224en: 2/2 Petition for nukeplant Bb 2"
- Previous message: Bill Ward: "Re: Hydrogen Production Method Could Bolster Fuel Supplies"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
