How ironic that the Gazette has paired a story about the governor’s push to bring more nuclear power and radioactive waste to Massachusetts with a picture of Pilgrim Nuclear in Plymouth from March 2011 [“With Healey push, nuclear debate revived on Plymouth’s shore,” Dec. 31]. That is the month and year that the meltdowns at Fukushima happened, spreading mega-doses of radioactivity around the world.
It doesn’t require an accident to add radioactivity to our habitat, though. All nuclear power facilities emit radiation into water and air as a matter of course. Exposure over time causes cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, etc. Read Harvard’s recent study about radiation-related illnesses around seven nuclear power sites in and near Massachusetts. The risk of disease increases the closer to the facility [https://tinyurl.com/35zbxcxk].
I disagree with the statement in the article that “Healey’s shift [toward nuclear] seems rooted in reality” because of a need to address high consumer costs and meet climate goals. Yes, there is a crisis, but let’s not jump from that frying pan into the nuclear fire. If you look at the entire nuclear fuel chain, from mining to end point operation, nuclear is actually a net carbon emitter. And at every step of its fuel chain, it pollutes and sickens. It’s just that it takes awhile for radiation’s impact to show up, making it easy for proponents to gaslight the public about the risks.
The reality is that Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are still on the drawing board. They will take years to bring to the point of mass production, if ever. Money spent on their deployment would be better invested in technologies available now. Many of the designs use highly enriched uranium fuel that creates a risk for proliferation, i.e. nuclear bombs. SMRs are not tested, and there are no clear cost parameters. As Alison McFarlane, a former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, says, they are “not ready for prime time” (Vancouver Sun), and their developers are “selling [us] a bridge to nowhere.” [CBC/Radio Canada]
In the larger context, the Trump administration has gutted the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s staff and ordered a relaxation of standards for radiation exposure and public consent for siting, operation, and decommissioning processes. The nuclear industry has a long history of cost overruns, lying, environmental racism, and fraud. And the governor wants to push nuclear in Massachusetts? One of her jobs is to protect the public, and she is walking right into a massive failure with this one.
Ann Darling lives in Easthampton.