Who's Online

We have 637 guests online

Popular

3868 readings
Cameco Uranium producer: call for divestment of funds - a question of ethics PDF Print E-mail
Peace News
Monday, 18 December 2006 05:19

2006 december 18

Cameco Uranium producer: call for divestment of funds - a question of ethics

Pej.news- Joan Russow, Global Compliance Research Project- Today it was announced that the stocks of Cameco ?the world's largest uranium producer- soared. While, politicians decry the proliferation of nuclear arms, the material source of the nuclear arms ? uranium - proliferates. As the late Dr. Fred Knelman- author of Nuclear Energy the Unforgiving Technology, and of America, God and the Bomb stated ?there is a little bit of Canadian uranium in all of the US nuclear arsenal? . One reason that there is a greater demand on uranium is the nuclear industry?s perpetuation of the myth that nuclear energy is the solution to climate change.

www.pej.org

 

If nuclear arms are to be abolished, and nuclear energy phased out, there has to be a call upon nuclear arms states to abide by Article VI of the Non Proliferation Treaty, and move towards dismantling nuclear weapons; and upon all states to discontinue all subsidies for all aspects of the nuclear industry, and upon all pension funds and upon all individuals to divest themselves from nuclear investments, including investments in Cameco.

THE MYTH THAT NUCLEAR ENERGY IS THE SOLUTION TO PREVENTION GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION AND THUS CLIMATE CHANGE MUST BE DISPELLED:

In the early 70s, the German peace and environment activists warned that the issue of climate change would be used to promote civil nuclear energy. (8 country Harvard study). This warning has been prophetic.

In 1992, At the United Nations Conference on the environment, Hans Blix the then President of the International Atomic Energy Agency, stood before the UN General Assembly and declared that nuclear energy was the solution to climate change. The IAEA was set up to monitor civil nuclear energy, and in advocating nuclear energy as the solution to climate change, has violated a fundamental principle that a regulator should not a promoter be.

On the Cameco site is a 2001, there is a press release for the Bonn Conference on Climate change; this press release was issued by the  International Nuclear forum and stated the following:
?Ministers at the Sixth Conference of the Parties agreed upon a compromise text outlining possible implementation of the Kyoto Protocol that discriminates against the single, most effective greenhouse gas control technology, according to members of the International Nuclear Forum (INF). "The political exclusion of nuclear electricity undermines the environmental integrity of this international effort to address global warming," said John Ritch of the World Nuclear Association.

The INF also pointed out that there are only two ways to effectively deal with greenhouse gas emissions: avoid making them or capture and store them. Nuclear energy is a proven technology that avoids greenhouse gases as well as pollutants that can cause smog and acid rain.?.
Tom Gorman of the Canadian Nuclear Association noted that nuclear provides reliable, cost-effective and emissions-free electricity in virtually all the major developed nations that are planning to accept mandatory emission targets under the Kyoto Protocol. "We remain hopeful that the agreement will be revised so Canada can help developing nations use nuclear technology safely through CDM," said Gorman.
Again in 2002, The nuclear industry was in full force at the Globe meeting in Vancouver; they even referred to the increase interest in nuclear energy as a ?nuclear renaissance?.

At the Globe meeting in Vancouver in 2004, representatives of the Nuclear industry described the increased interest in nuclear power as a ?nuclear renaissance?

In 2006, Cameco is circulating again information about the support for nuclear energy as the solution to climate change in reporting on the G8 meeting in St. Petersburg:

?The G8 leaders meeting held in St. Petersburg in July 2006 singled out the development of nuclear energy as an important component of global energy security while simultaneously reducing harmful air pollution and addressing the climate change challenge. The G8 reaffirmed their objective set out in the 2004 G8 Action Plan on non-proliferation to allow all countries to have reliable access to nuclear energy on a competitive basis. ?

NO SOLUTION SHOULD BE WORSE OR EQUALLY BAD AS THE PROBLEM IT IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS

In 1991, March 1991 - House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment, final report titled "Out of Balance: the Risks of Irreversible Climate Change" stated that the addressing of one environmental problem should not itself be an action that could cause irreversible harm

While, the IAEA was lauding civil nuclear energy as a solution to climate change, civil society at the UN Summit was calling for phasing out of nuclear energy:

The Women?s Action Agenda affirmed:

We urge that All ?new nuclear research, development, production, and use be stopped, that uranium mining be halted, and that nuclear power production and use be phased out and replaced by environment-friendly energy sources,? (Women?s Action Agenda, 1992)

And called upon member states of the United Nations:

? To halt the manufacture and sale of all nuclear reactors together with a rapid phase out of nuclear power replacing it with efficiency conservation and renewable sources
[There is ample evidence that a combination of the latter can more than replace the loss of nuclear power]

and in a Nobel Laureate Declaration, there was a call for
for establishment of a time-table for phasing out ... nuclear energy and for the rapid development of solar and other forms of non-polluting energy, and for more efficient energy use (Nobel Laureate Declaration, UNCED, 1992)

In the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change of which the Kyoto Protocol is a part, there is the affirmation of the precautionary principle

?The Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures, taking into account that policies and measures to deal with climate change should be cost-effective so as to ensure global benefits at the lowest possible cost. (Climate Change Convention)?

There has been sufficient evidence of the irreversible damage caused by the mining of uranium, the nuclear waste disposal from civil nuclear reactors, the health and environmental costs of nuclear accidents or emissions, and of the use of depleted uranium in weapons systems, to justify the banning of the mining of the source of these costs- uranium mining; there is also sufficient evidence to justify the opposition to the nuclear industry?s taking advantage of the global concern about climate change in their promotion of a technology with widespread health, environmental, war-related irreversible consequences.

INEXTRICABLE LINK BETWEEN CIVIL NUCLEAR ENERGY AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR ARMS

When India and Pakistan tested their nuclear weapons, the civil nuclear energy connection was exposed:

?In 1955, Canada supplied India with a research reactor, CIRUS, fueled by
uranium which Canada also supplied. On May the 18th, 1974 India
exploded a nuclear device about the size of the Nagasaki bomb. The IAEA
was unable to monitor the Indian use of CIRUS because it was not
safeguarded, ie. not under the aegis of responsibility of the IAEA.
During various disarmament conferences in the late 1960s the Canadian
delegation at the UN was repeatedly warned by other nations of the use to
which the CIRUS plutonium was really directed. In the United Nations
Disarmament conferences of May 1965 and July 1965 in Geneva the Indian
representative hinted that India's only alternative to the October 1964
Chinese atomic explosion was to build a bomb. In 1971 Prime Minister
Trudeau traveled to New Delhi to discuss the issue of the CIRUS reactor
with Indian Prime Minister Indira Ghandi. He accepted Indian promises of
maintaining a peaceful nuclear energy program. (Information drawn from Dr.
Fred Knelman's "Nuclear Energy the Unforgiving Technology" (1978) and Ron Finch's "Exporting Danger").

ABOLITION AND PHASING OUT STARTS WITH THE SOURCE OF URANIUM

If nuclear arms are to be abolished, and nuclear energy phased out, there has to be a call upon nuclear arms states to abide by Article VI of the Non Proliferation Treaty, and move towards dismantling nuclear weapons; and upon all states to discontinue all subsidies for all aspects of the nuclear industry, and upon all pension funds and upon all individual to divest themselves from nuclear investments, including investments in Cameco.

The Campaign could start with divesting all interests in Cameco.

 

Last Updated on Wednesday, 29 July 2015 16:23
 

Latest News