Beyond Nuclear, while U.S. based, recognizes that the issue of nuclear power, particularly in relation to climate change and reactor expansion, has become an international issue. Multi-national corporations, often with foreign ownership, have taken over every facet of the nuclear fuel chain, from uranium mining to waste disposition. Beyond Nuclear is currently engaged in supportive efforts in a number of different countries.



Save the tigers used as cover story to green light uranium exploration

Writes Survival International: "Officials in India are threatening to evict a tribe from a tiger reserve in the name of conservation – but have just approved uranium exploration in the same reserve. The move has angered campaigners, who accuse the authorities of hypocrisy.

The Chenchu tribe in Amrabad tiger reserve have pleaded to be allowed to stay on the land which they have been dependent on and managed for millennia.

Indian authorities justify their forced evictions of tribal people – which are illegal according to national and international law – on the grounds that any human presence in the reserves is harmful to tigers. However, in many tiger reserves in India, fee-paying tourists are allowed to visit in large numbers, and road-building, mineral exploration and even mining have all taken place." More


Rosatom recognizes renewables as the future

At a recent conference, Rosatom’s deputy director Vyacheslav Pershukov called the market for nuclear power stations abroad “exhausted.” Rosatom is showing interest in small hydroelectric plants and wind energy. More.


Michael Flynn, Russia and a Grand Scheme to Build Nuclear Power Plants in Saudi Arabia and the Arab World


Stopping nuclear build in Wales: a guide to messaging

In March 2017, Beyond Nuclear conducted two workshops at the Green Nuclear-Free Wales conference for activists in Aberystwyth. The workshops were titled “Framing the anti-nuclear message using Welsh values.” We ran through some exercises together to reframe our messages using terms and imagery that we felt would resonate with the audiences we need to convince to oppose new nuclear build in Wales. We also identified messengers we thought would be most trusted by our target audiences. Finally, we discussed communication tools. This handbook was produced to reflect that work, to serve as a guide and to provide exercises for messaging and framing as the campaigns continue. Please feel free to download, print and distribute copies.


Protect the Great Lakes from Radioactive Risks: Submit comments to IJC by April 15!

The Great LakesPublic comments to International Joint Commission needed re: atomic reactor, radioactive waste, and other nuclear risks to the Great Lakes! Please take action & spread the word!

The Great Lakes, shared by the United States of America and Canada, as well as a very large number of Native American First Nations, comprise 21% of the world's surface fresh water, and 84% of North America's. They are the lifeblood of one of the largest regional economies in the entire world, and provide drinking water for 40 million people. And yet, they are at dire radioactive risk, from dozens of atomic reactors, radioactive waste storage (and even disposal) sites, and other nuclear facilities.

Michael Keegan (Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes, Don't Waste Michigan) and Kevin Kamps (Beyond Nuclear, Don't Waste MI) delivered public comments to the International Joint Commission (IJC) at its Oregon, Ohio (near Toledo) meeting on Thursday, March 23rd at a very well attended session (around 175 people there) re: public comments on the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 2012 (GLWQA 2012).

Both urged approval of the nomination of radionuclides as chemicals of mutual concern, under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 2012 (see <> for more information). Kevin was able to thank National Wildlife Federation, and Ohio Environmental Council, by name (as they were in the room, and had made presentations before him), for joining with over 100 other organizations, in launching this Canadian Environmental Law Association-led petition, 13 months ago now.

Both Keegan and Kamps touched on the Ontario Power Generation Deep Geologic Repository; the potential for high-level radioactive waste barge shipments on the Great Lakes under various irradiated nuclear fuel export plans (to Yucca Mountain, Nevada; to Waste Control Specialists, Texas; etc.); highly radioactive liquid waste truck shipments that present a high-risk to the Great Lakes; and (given the location of the meeting, on the Lake Erie shore) the risks at the Fermi 2 (and proposed new Fermi 3) and Davis-Besse atomic reactors, both near Toledo on the Lake Erie shore. (See links for more info. on all these subjects, towards the bottom of this post. Of course, similar risks exist at every one of the dozens of atomic reactors located on the Great Lakes shore.) They handed out copies of the 2013 "Great Lakes Region Nuclear Hot Spots" map by Anna Tilman/IICPH (International Institute of Concern for Public Health) and John Jackson/GLU (Great Lakes United). (See this map posted online here.) Atomic reactor, radioactive waste, and other nuclear risks throughout the Great Lakes Basin -- including those near or upstream of tens of millions of people -- are fair game to raise in IJC's public comment proceeding.

IJC has held a series of public meetings throughout the Great Lakes Basin, to gather information from the public on the IJC's draft Triennial Assessment of Progress (TAP) report(External link) and the Progress Report of the Governments of Canada and the United States under the 2012 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

Written public comments can still be submitted, till April 15th, via email and web form:

Comments on both the IJC’s draft TAP report(External link) and the Governments' Progress Report are welcome until April 15, 2017 via email to link), online at

In addition to the ideas for your own public comments listed above, please consider urging the IJC to undertake a comprehensive, long-view (looking decades ahead), science-based review of the risks of transporting, "temporarily" storing, incinerating (as done with all of Ontario's combustible "low" level radioactive wastes, at Bruce Nuclear Generating Station's Western Waste Management Facility on the Lake Huron shore), and disposing (burying, or abandoning) radioactive wastes of all categories (so-called low, intermediate, and high-level) on the Great Lakes shoreline, as well as within the Great Lakes Basin. (Of course, all that begs the question, why is radioactive waste being generated on the shore and in the basin in the first place?!)

The IJC cannot undertake such a needed review, if blocked by either the U.S. and/or Canadian federal governments. So pressure from the concerned public will have to be exerted, as well, on the U.S. Congress and Canadian Parliament, as well as on the President/Secretary of State/Environmental Protection Agency Administrator and Prime Minister/Foreign Affairs Minister/Environment and Climate Change Minister, respectively.


1.) Re: Ontario Power Generation Deep Geologic Repository:

SOS Great Lakes -
Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump -

(Sign the petition! If your town and/or county hasn't passed a resolution yet, urge them to do so!)

Beyond Nuclear -
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility
- (Do a search for OPG's proposed DGR)
Northwatch -
Know Nuclear Waste - (focused mainly on high level waste or irradiated fuel in Canada, but has some information on OPG's proposed DGR)

Great Lakes Environmental Alliance (GLEA) -

Other key documents:

The CEAA's Public Registry  on the proposed deep underground dump                            
The February 2016 
letter from Minister to OPG requiring additional information from OPG
OPG's "additional information" is posted here: CEAR # 2883 

2.) Re: the potential for high-level radioactive waste barge shipments on the Great Lakes under various irradiated nuclear fuel export plans (to Yucca Mountain, Nevada; to Waste Control Specialists, Texas; etc.):

3.) Re: highly radioactive liquid waste truck shipments that present a high-risk to the Great Lakes:

4.) Re: the risks at the Fermi 2 (and proposed new Fermi 3 -- and don't forget about the "We Almost Lost Detroit" Fermi 1 reactor!):

5.) Re: the risks at Davis-Besse atomic reactors:

20 MORE Years of Radioactive Russian Roulette?!

What Humpty Dumpty Does NOT Want You to Know: Davis-Besse's Cracked Containment Snow Job

(Of course, similar risks exist at every one of the dozens of atomic reactors located on the Great Lakes shoreline!)