Reexamine the approval of building 2 new nuclear plants in South Carolina

The Issue

The approval of SCE&G’s two new nuclear power plants in South Carolina is shocking. Why? Because it is dangerous for our safety and our health. We know that the new reactor design yet to be built is already deemed unsafe. Chairman Jaczko of the US Nuclear Regulatory Committee that approved the plants, was the lone vote against the approval because all the recent Fukushima-related safety enhancements will not be required. Tom Clements of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in Columbia adds that the design "is very vulnerable in the face of an earthquake." Building two more plants will be increasing our state's risk by 50% because our 4 existing ones are already on the list of NRC’s top 104 nuclear power reactors in the US that are most at-risk. Should one of our at-risk reactors cause a nuclear fallout, EVERYBODY in the state would be affected. South Carolina is 200 miles wide and 260 miles long. In a fallout, people 30 miles away could be dead in a few hours, people as far as 250 miles away would also lose white blood cells temporarily, and their area would contain unsafe radioactivity levels for 2-3 years after a fallout. Since a majority of the SC population live within 50 miles of the four existing nuclear power plants, the result would be devastating. On a day to day basis, the surroundings of all nuclear power plants are exposed to:  iodine 131, strontium 90, cesium 137, and plutonium 239, which have been found to increase the risk of childhood leukemia and many forms of cancer. Adding two new nuclear power plants will increase these health risks by 50%. Because it does not make economic sense. The cost to build, maintain and dispose of radioactive waste is greater than the revenue nuclear power plants will generate. Before the triple meltdown at Fukushima, Wall Street was wary of investing in nuclear power. Moody’s called nuclear power a ‘bet-the-farm risk,' while Citibank called it a ‘corporation killer.’ MidAmerican, a subsidiary of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, found that building new reactors did not make economic sense. Because there are other options. Since Fukushima, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland have decided to phase out nuclear power. Siemens, the largest engineering firm in Europe, is getting out of nuclear power entirely; renewable energy is its strongest line of business. SCE&G will soon request rate hikes to pay for these new reactors in advance. South Carolinians will be wasting money and paying to kill themselves too.
This petition had 50 supporters

The Issue

The approval of SCE&G’s two new nuclear power plants in South Carolina is shocking. Why? Because it is dangerous for our safety and our health. We know that the new reactor design yet to be built is already deemed unsafe. Chairman Jaczko of the US Nuclear Regulatory Committee that approved the plants, was the lone vote against the approval because all the recent Fukushima-related safety enhancements will not be required. Tom Clements of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in Columbia adds that the design "is very vulnerable in the face of an earthquake." Building two more plants will be increasing our state's risk by 50% because our 4 existing ones are already on the list of NRC’s top 104 nuclear power reactors in the US that are most at-risk. Should one of our at-risk reactors cause a nuclear fallout, EVERYBODY in the state would be affected. South Carolina is 200 miles wide and 260 miles long. In a fallout, people 30 miles away could be dead in a few hours, people as far as 250 miles away would also lose white blood cells temporarily, and their area would contain unsafe radioactivity levels for 2-3 years after a fallout. Since a majority of the SC population live within 50 miles of the four existing nuclear power plants, the result would be devastating. On a day to day basis, the surroundings of all nuclear power plants are exposed to:  iodine 131, strontium 90, cesium 137, and plutonium 239, which have been found to increase the risk of childhood leukemia and many forms of cancer. Adding two new nuclear power plants will increase these health risks by 50%. Because it does not make economic sense. The cost to build, maintain and dispose of radioactive waste is greater than the revenue nuclear power plants will generate. Before the triple meltdown at Fukushima, Wall Street was wary of investing in nuclear power. Moody’s called nuclear power a ‘bet-the-farm risk,' while Citibank called it a ‘corporation killer.’ MidAmerican, a subsidiary of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, found that building new reactors did not make economic sense. Because there are other options. Since Fukushima, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland have decided to phase out nuclear power. Siemens, the largest engineering firm in Europe, is getting out of nuclear power entirely; renewable energy is its strongest line of business. SCE&G will soon request rate hikes to pay for these new reactors in advance. South Carolinians will be wasting money and paying to kill themselves too.

The Decision Makers

US Nuclear Regulatory Committee
US Nuclear Regulatory Committee

Petition Updates